report - stage 1 final old

7/30/2019 Report - Stage 1 Final Old

1/26

Veermata Jijabai Technological Institute Structural Engineering Dept.

Swapnil Toraskar Page 1112040007

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

It is often necessary to measure the existing stress or strain in concrete structures at any

point of time and to determine the changes in the stress either from externally applied varying

loads on the structure, changes in temperature, moisture or long term creep.

When determining the condition of existing concrete structure and their elements, the

ability to accurately determine the in situ member stresses would enable the engineer to make

proper assessments. Unfortunately, the in situ stresses cannot be readily determined in most

structures because information about the load distribution and restraint of time-dependent

deformations is unknown. There are various methods to determine residual stresses in structure

which can be used to measure in-situ stress in structure. Some of them are summarised as

follows.

1.1.1 ASTM standard test method for steel members :[Designation: E 83701

e1]

This test method covers the procedure for determining residual stresses near the surface of

isotropic linearly-elastic materials. Although the concept is quite general, the test method is

applicable in those cases where the stresses do not vary significantly with depth and do not

exceed one half of the yield strength. The test method is often described as semi -destructive

because the damage that it causes is very localized and in many cases does not significantly

affect the usefulness of the specimen. In contrast, most other mechanical methods for measuring

residual stress substantially destroy the specimen. Since the test method does cause some

damage, it should be applied only in those cases either where the specimen is expendable or

where the introduction of a small shallow hole will not significantly affect the usefulness of the

specimen.


2/26



Summary of Test Method:

A strain gage rosette with three or more elements of the general type schematically

illustrated in Fig. 1 is placed in the area under consideration. The numbering scheme for

the strain gages follows a clockwise (CW) convention.

A hole is drilled at the geometric center of the strain gage rosette to a depth of about 0.4

of the mean diameter of the strain gage circle, D.

The residual stresses in the area surrounding the drilled hole relax. The relieved strains

are measured with a suitable strain-recording instrument. Within the close vicinity of the

hole, the relief is nearly complete when the depth of the drilled hole approaches 0.4 of the

mean diameter of the strain gage circle, D.

Fig. 1 Schematic Diagram showing the Geometry of a typical Three-Element Clockwise

(CW) Strain Gage Rosette for the Hole-Drilling Method.

[Reference: Fig. 1 pg.2 ASTM standard test method for steel members E 837 01e1]


3/26



Fig. 2 Representation of stress release

[Reference: Fig. 2, pg.2 ASTM standard test method for steel members E 837 01e1

]

Fig. 2 shows a schematic representation of the residual stress and a typical surface strain

relieved when a hole is drilled into a material specimen. The surface strain relief is

related to the relieved principal stresses by the following relationship:

r = (A+B cos 2) max +(A -B cos 2) min

Where:

r = relieved strain measured by a radially aligned strain gage centered at P,

A ,B= calibration constants,

max = maximum (most tensile) and

min = minimum (most compressive) principal stresses present at the hole location before

drilling,

= angle measured clockwise from the direction of gage 1 to the direction ofmax,

D = diameter of the gage circle,

D0 = diameter of the drilled hole.


4/26



Strain gauge patterns:

Fig. 3 shows the type A rosette, first introduced by Rendleer and Vigness [22]. This

pattern is available in several different sizes, and is recommended for general-purpose

use.

Fig. 4 shows type B rosette. This pattern has all strain gage grids located on one side. It is

useful where measurements need to be made near an obstacle.

Fig. 5 shows the type C rosette. This special purpose pattern has three pairs of opposite

strain gage grids that are to be connected as three half-bridges. It is useful where large

strain sensitivity and high thermal stability are required.

Fig.3a Rosette Type A Fig.3b Rosette Type B

Fig.3c Rosette Type C

[Reference: Fig. 3 pg.4, ASTM standard test method for steel members E 837 01e1

]


5/26



1.1.2 Hole-Drilling Technique:In the early 1980s Gifford and Partners initiated a program of work on an instrumented

concrete coring technique now known as stress relief coring. Trial tests were performed on

structures in service and calibrations carried out in the laboratory on uniaxially and biaxially

loaded slabs. These tests resulted in two nominal stress-relief core size of 75 and 150mm

diameters. This method relies on the measurement of surface strains around the periphery of a

large diameter core. The core is cut incrementally, and the strains recorded as drilling proceeds.

When a reasonably stable and constant strain profile is reached drilling is stopped, and the core

broken off and extracted. The core itself can then be used to measure the properties of the host

concrete. This method was developed by Mehrkar-Asl [19] and is shown diagrammatically in

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. Hole drilling technique steps.

[Reference: Fig. 1 pg.255, [14]]


6/26



1.1.3 Slot cutting technique (slitting technique):

This method has been extensively developed and used in France by Abdunur [2] and involves

the cutting of a small slot in the concrete surface by means of a circular cutter in a controlled

manner to release surface stresses. The initial state of stress (or strain) is then reestablished by

means of a flat jack and hence the initial state of the structure is established. This is shown

diagrammatically in Fig 5.

(a) Initial state.

(b) Stress release.

(c) Controlled compensation and reestablishment

Fig. 5 Stages of direct stress evaluations using the slot cutting technique.

[Reference: Fig. 2 pg.256, [14]]

Fig. 6 Schematic of slot cutting technique

[Reference: Fig. 1, [21]]


7/26



This technique is good for measuring uniaxial residual stress profiles in specimens with

prismatic cross sections, where the stress profile only varies in one direction (i.e. in the direction

of incremental cutting), and moment and stress distributions across the measurement section are

balanced.

1.1.4 Ring core (RC) technique:

The technique involves cutting an annular groove into a component and the resulting surface

strain relaxation within the central core is measured at predetermined depth increments using a

strain gauge rosette (SGR) or optical methods. The surface strain relaxation is then decomposed

into residual stresses for each depth increment using numerically determined influence

coefficients [28, 29, 30] from Finite Element Analysis. Typically, depths are limited to 5mm for

a standard 14mm diameter core, but the use of different strain gauges and groove geometries will

permit changes in total measurement depth. In the past the RC technique was mainly used to

measure uniform stress profiles to a depth of 5mm or less, however with recent advancements

in analysis techniques and the development of a core removal procedure these depths have been

extended to 25mm.

Fig.7 Schematic of the SGR arrangement and central core during the RC technique.

[Reference: [32]]


8/26



The bi-axial residual stresses measured (i.e. xx, yyand xy) are an average of those acting across

the cross-section of the central core. They can be calculated from the incremental strain

measurements to provide either a single set of bi-axial results averaged over the total depth

drilled or a variation in bi-axial residual stresses with depth drilled. The most commonly used

analysis methods are the Incremental and Integral methods, with the Integral method providing

the most accurate results.


9/26



CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 General

A review of literature pertaining to the present investigation has been carried out. This chapter

contains a brief description about the literature survey done for the present work. It includes

research on Stress Relief Coring Method. This will help in well organization of work and to

decide the line of action for this present study.

S. Mehrkar-asl (1988) invented method for the stress relief measurement in pres-tress bridges

using concrete coring [19]. In this paper, the adequate core size to be used is discussed with

respect to the ratio of maximum aggregate size to the dimension of the released area. Calibration

tests performed on the slabs with the uniaxial and biaxial loading along with gauge pattern for

the 75 mm core is discussed in detail with suitability to limitations i.e. lack of concentric loading

and change in material properties over a bigger area. Details of a designed jacking assembly to

load against the walls 75 mm diameter hole with function of the key parts is discussed.

Test was performed on the slab loaded uniaxially with gauge monitoring; jacking test is

discussed along with the principal strains calculation derived on the basis of Lightfoot [13] least

square approach. Stresses are calculated by using the plane stress equations of elastic theory to

convert the principal stains into principal stresses. Stress conversion coefficients are calculated

and compared experimentally and theoretically using equations derived by Muskhelishvili [20].

M. J. Ryall (1996) described the progress made so far in the measurement of stresses in concrete

structures using an instrumented hard-inclusion technique [14]. The method is based on the stress

relief principle which measures relieved stresses around adjacent to a discontinuity formed in a

solid mass. The proposed method uses small diameter mild steel cylinder instrumented with

gauge rosettes attached to the circular ends for measuring bi-dimensional strains. Calibration

tests on eight concrete samples are described and the results of the tests published. The test

results indicate that the method is both accurate and practical, with service stresses under dead

loads estimated to within +/-5 %.

Ismael Rumzan and Douglas R. Schmitt (2003) presented a parametric description of Three-

dimensional Stress-relief Displacements from Blind-hole Drilling [11]. The primary motivation


10/26



for the study is to develop a methodology for calculating the entire set of stress-relief

displacements for use with optical interferometric measurements that can be sensitive to the

entire displacement field.

A series of parametric formulae describing the three dimensional stress-relief displacement field

induced by the drilling of a small stress-relieving hole has been constructed. The direct formulae,

which relate stress-relief displacements to radial position and azimuth, relative hole dimensions,

residual or applied stress, and Poisson's ratio, are constructed from an extensive series of finite

element calculations. The final formulae are derived from a large set of trial formulae that best

describe the displacements according to a statistical regression analysis.

S. Pessiki and H. Turker (2003) presented a Theoretical Development of the Core drilling

Method for Non-destructive Evaluation of Stresses in Concrete Structures. In (2005) M.J.

McGinnis, S. Pessiki and H. Turker presented a theoretical background and the design and

results of verification experiments for a nondestructive core-drilling method [15, 16,17] to

determine the state of stress in concrete in an existing structure are presented. The method is

similar to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) hole-drilling strain gage

method [3], except that the core-drilling method is formulated in terms of displacement rather

than strain. Measurements in the current work are performed with traditional photogrammetry,

and the more novel (and more accurate) three-dimensional digital image correlation. In this paper

review of the background elasticity theory is done with the discussion of the results of

verification experiments on steel plates. Author claimed that calculated normal stresses are

within 17% of applied values for photogrammetry, and 7% for three-dimensional digital image

correlation. In (2007) M.J. McGinnis, S. Pessiki presented a study ofWater-Induced Swelling

Displacements in Core Drilling Method.

Trautner C.,McGinnis, M. and Pessiki (2010) presented Analytical and Numerical

Development of the Incremental Core-Drilling method of Non-Destructive Determination of In-

situ Stresses in Concrete Structures. Scope of the study seeks to combine elements of the

currently available method of concrete stress investigation known as the core-drilling method

with the IF method to create a general, non-destructive technique of investigating stresses in

concrete structures. To accomplish this goal, analytical formulations of the IF method [4, 5,

25,26] as adapted to the geometry and measurement configuration used in the core-drilling


11/26



method are presented. IF function matrices for the practical implementation of the technique

were calculated based on displacements from axisymmetric and 3D finite element simulations.

Modelling inputs, including material, geometrical, and load properties are described in detail.

The solution of the IF matrices is then described. Sources of error in both the modeling

procedure and solution technique are described and quantified.

The calibration displacements indicated that there is a limit to how deep a core may be drilled

before the difference in displacement measured between successive increments becomes too

small to be useful. The solution procedure for the IF matrices was verified by the accurate

reproduction of the calibration displacements. The accuracy of the technique was verified outside

the solution procedure by the accurate calculation of in-situ stresses in a finite element model.

In (2011) authors presented the development of non destructive technique to assess in-situ

stresses in concrete named the incremental core-drilling method (ICDM) [30]. In this method, a

core is drilled into a concrete structure in discrete increments. The displacements which occur

locally around the perimeter of the core at each increment are measured and related to the in-situ

stresses by an elastic calculation process known as the influence function method [4, 5, 25,26].

This paper presents the analytical and numerical techniques necessary for practical use of the

ICDM, as well as results from experimental tests in which simple concrete beams were subjected

to controlled loads and in-situ stresses measured via the ICDM were compared to known stress

distributions. Finite element analysis of core drilling process [29] is simulated by removing

layers of elements in a simulated structure to determine matrices of IF coefficients relating mean

stress to radial displacements and shear and deviatoric stress to radial displacements. The in

experiments displacements were captured using ARAMIS suit of DIC software [8]. The ability

of the technique to accurately measure a variety of different stress distributions is demonstrated,

and practical considerations for an ICDM investigation are discussed.

Andre Coudret , Gilles Hovhanessian , Benoit Kroely , VA Eric Laurent, John Stieb. (2006)

presented insights of Slot stress technique. Authors have presents recently developed, easily

implementable technique derived from mining industry to measure stresses in rock mass. The

technique is designed to improve the precision of in-situ stress measurement in concrete and is

based on the principle of strain relief in which the strain field is relieved by coring or slotting the


12/26



material; the change of the strain in the relieved area is measured and the stress is calculated

taking into account the elastic properties of the material and the geometry of the cut.

The Slotstress technique with principle and testing process is explained in brief. Two case

studies are presented, one at Champlain Bridge, Montreal Canada and another at Lin Bridge,

Kortrijk, Belgium. The technique has passed several trials conducted by various independent

organizations in several countries, and has been successfully implemented on several projects

internationally

Hammerschmidt S. F. (2008) developed the surface-strain relief method [10] to measure initial

or pre-existing strains in a concrete member. It involves relieving the strain in the member and

measuring the change in strain. Two methods were testedone used a linear electrical-resistance

strain gage and a three-inch-diameter diamond concrete core bit to cut around the gage, and the

second method used a laser-speckle imaging device and a diamond cutting wheel to create

notches perpendicular to the axis of maximum strain. Both methods measured the change in

strain and related it to within 10 percent of the actual prestress force (fse). The method of cutting

notches and the laser-speckle imaging device provided a simpler method to be implemented in

the field, while the coring method achieved a higher level of accuracy and precision.

Hammerschmidt S. F.,Robert J. Peterman (2010) investigated a method of surface strain

relief where the change in strain at the surface of concrete members is used to determine the insitu stress. The method involved mounting a linear electrical-resistance strain gage along the axis

of maximum stress, coring around the gage, and then relating the change in strain to the

corresponding stress in the member. Members were fabricated and varying stresses were applied

in order to determine the accuracy of the method. Results were then compared to the global

stresses and to the theoretical local stresses predicted by two different finite element models. In

order to improve the accuracy of the surface-strain relief method, a procedure was introduced

whereby the core was fractured along its base and subsequently removed from the member. This

served to eliminate possible shear stresses between the core and surrounding member, allowing

for the full release of strains.

Hak-Chul Shin, Vincent P. Chiarito and Farshad Amini (2010) performed a study to

understand the mechanics of physical cube tests by comparing measured vertical strains with


13/26



numerical analysis values and to investigate the effects of strain relief by making slots and holes

in a concrete cube [9]. In this experiment with a predetermined maximum compressive load,

plain concrete cubes were loaded gradually and strains between slots and holes were measured.

Linear-elastic numerical models simulating the physical tests were developed in Abaqus and the

analytical results were compared with measured strain relief values. From this comparison, some

insights were obtained like, the strain relief by making slots in cube tests is related to the slot

depth-to-spacing (SDS) ratio, the compressive vertical strains between the two slots decrease

with increasing SDS ratio and reach to zero strain at the SDS ratio of 0.35, at the SDS ratio

higher than 0.35, the strains between two slots become tensile.

A. Nau. B. Scholtes (2012)evaluated the high speed drilling technique for the incremental hole

drilling method. Detailed comparison between different bits and drilling techniques was carried

out and is discussed in this paper in order to detect the best experimental conditions and to find

out reasons especially for the lack of accuracy of the hole-drilling method for the first increments

close to the specimens surface. Numerical calibration of the Hole drilling- process is done with

the finite element analysis. For the experimental evaluation a strain gauge rosette with eight grids

[6, 7, 18, 23, 24] is used. The consequences of the different drilling techniques and bits used on

calculated residual stresses are highlighted using differential formalism [12] applied to strain -

stress transformation. Author comes out with the conclusion that orbital drilling with common

used six-blade bits results in the best compromise of an ideal cylindrical hole and centricity to

the center of the strain gage rosette.

2.2 Critical comments on literature review:

1. S. Mehrkar-asl (1988) invented method for the stress relief measurement in pres-tress

bridges using concrete coring.

2. M. J. Ryall (1996) described the progress made so far in the measurement of stresses in

concrete structures using an instrumented hard-inclusion technique.

3. Ismael Rumzan and Douglas R. Schmitt (2003)presented a parametric description of

Three-dimensional Stress-relief Displacements from Blind-hole Drilling.


14/26



4. M. J. McGinnis, S. Pessiki and H. Turker(2003, 2005and 2007) presented a theoretical

background and the design and results of verification experiments for a nondestructive

core-drilling method

5. Trautner C., McGinnis M. J. and Pessiki (2010 and 2011) presented Analytical and

Numerical Development of the Incremental Core-Drilling method of Non-Destructive

Determination of In-situ Stresses in Concrete Structures.

6. Andre Coudret, Gilles Hovhanessian , Benoit Kroely, VA Eric Laurent, John Stieb

(2006)presented insights of Slot stress technique.

7. Hammerschmidt S. F. (2008) developed the surface-strain relief method to measure

initial or pre-existing strains in a concrete member.

8. Hammerschmidt S. F., Robert J. Peterman (2010) investigated a method of surface

strain relief where the change in strain at the surface of concrete members is used to

determine the in situ stress.

9. Hak-Chul Shin, Vincent P. Chiarito and Farshad Amini (2010) performed a study to

understand the mechanics of physical cube tests by comparing measured vertical strains

with numerical analysis values and to investigate the effects of strain relief by making

slots and holes in a concrete cube

10.A. Nau. B. Scholtes (2012) evaluated the high speed drilling technique for the

incremental hole drilling method.

2.3 Aim and Objective:

To evaluate structure as a part of load rating determination or to determine repair or

replacement, reliable information about the in-situ state of stress in the concrete of an existing

structure can be critical. Therefore, the main objectives of this work are:

To review the literatures based on exiting research of In-situ stress determination

techniques.

To establish and demonstrate a convenient and reliable methodology for estimating in-

situ stresses in a structure using stress relief coring and to compare results by finite

element method with particular emphasis on columns elements.

Experimental determination of in-situ stresses in laboratory using strain gauge rosettes.


15/26



Modelling and analysis of column on ANSYS 14.0 which is based on Finite Element

Method (FEM).

Preparation of a comparative statement of results.

2.4 Scope of Study

The present study is focused on the following:

Determination of in-situ stresses in a concrete column using strain gauge rosettes.

Preparation of table of comparative results of in- situ stresses by Experimental and Finite

Element Analysis results.


16/26



CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 General

Current study involves verification of experimental results obtained from the strain with

numerical modelling simulated using ANSYS 12.1. An attempt will be made to determine in-situ

stresses using methodology proposed by Meherkar-Asl [6] and ASTM Hole drilling strain gauge

method [1] for residual stress. In this proposed method in place of Demec strain gauges used in

core drilling method [6] strain gauge rosettes will be used and results are verified with the

numerical modelling. Numerical modelling, analysis, solution, post processing, result

interpretation using ANSYS 12.1 is briefly described as below.

3.2ANSYS

Ansys is a general purpose finite element modelling software for numerically solving a wide

variety of mechanical problems. These problems include static/dynamic structural analysis (both

linear and non-linear), heat transfer and fluid problems, as well as acoustic and electro-magnetic

problems. As far as structural analysis is concerned, the following types of analyses are possible:

Static analysis, Modal analysis, Harmonic analysis, Transient dynamic analysis, Spectrum

analysis and buckling analysis.

The primary unknowns are the nodal degrees of freedom. For structural analysis problems,these degrees of freedoms are displacements. Other quantities such as stresses, strains and

reaction forces are derived from the nodal displacements.

In general, a finite element solution may be broken into the following three stages. This is a

general guideline that can be used for setting up any finite element analysis.

1. Pre-processing: defining the problem; the major steps in pre-processing are given

below:

Define key points/lines/areas/volumes.

Define element type, real constants and material/geometric properties.

Mesh lines/areas/volumes as required.

The amount of detail required will depend on the dimensionality of the analysis (i.e. 1D, 2D,

axisymmetric, 3D).


17/26



2. Solution: assigning loads, constraints and solving; here we specify the loads (point or

pressure), constraints (translational and rotational) and finally solve the resulting set of

equations.

3. Post processing: further processing and viewing of the results; in this stage one may

wish to see:

Lists/Plots of nodal displacements.

Element forces and moments.

Deflection plots.

Stress contour diagrams.

3.3 Example.

To study the effect of the stress concentration due to hole present in structure followingexample is solved using numerical and analytical method and results are compared.

Fig.8 Example.

A steel plate with a hole of 75 mm diameter subjected to a uniform pressure of 100kN .Length

and width of plate is 500mm and 250 mm respectively. Thickness of the plate is 10 mm. Young's

modulus:-200GPa, Poissions ratio: 0.3

Interpretation and comparison of results: Analytical solution:

so= F/A= (100000 X 0.25 X 0.010)/(0.010 X 0.25)= 10000 N/m2

snominal= F/Anominal= (100000 X 0.25 X 0.010)/(0.010 X (0.25-0.075))

snominal= 142857.14 N/m2

W

L


18/26



smax= K x snominal (where K= stress concentration factor)

Fig.9 Stress concentration factor for rectangular plate with central hole under axial load.

[Adapted from Collins (1981).Reference: Figure 6.2, page 222]

For d/b= 75/250= 0.3, from graph shown above K=2.35.

smax= 2.35 x 142857.14

smax= 335714.29 N/m2

................................................................................................................(1)

Numerical solution by ANSYS:

Numerical analysis is performed using ANSYS 14.0 with symmetrical boundary condition

applied to adjacent edges of the hole.

Element type: Plane 182

Meshing size: smart size 4

Young's modulus:-200GPa,

Poissions ratio: 0.3


19/26



Fig. 10 Numerical model.

Fig. 11 Contour plot of stresses in Y direction


20/26



Fig.12 Contour plot of stresses in X direction

Contour plot of stress in X direction shows that most of the plate is in constant stress, and

there is a stress concentration around the hole. The more red areas correspond to a high, tensile

(positive) stress and the bluer areas correspond to areas of compressive (negative) stress.

Maximum stress: 336771 N/mm2

................................................................................................(2)

Difference in solution obtained is 0.314 %, which is acceptable.

Analytical solution for srr :

We know that ,

2 2

0

rr 2 2

a 3a1 1 1 cos 2

2 r r

at "r"= "a" i.e. at the hole boundary.

srr = 0.


21/26



Fig. 13. Normal stress at hole boundary [Reference: [30]]

We see that srr at the hole is the normal stress at the hole. Since the hole is a free surface, this

has to be zero.

ANSYS solution for srr:

Fig.14. Radial stress contours.

Result shows that at boundary stress does not show zero value, but at srr ranging from -206

N/mm2

to 54 N.mm2

which is 0.4% of the average stress and can be considered as zero.

Analytical solution for s :

We know that,

2 4

0

2 4

a 3a1 1 cos 2

2 r r

at "r" = "a" i.e. at the hole boundary.


22/26



s = s0(1+ 2cos 2)

at = 0 , s = s0 =100kN

at = 90 , s = 3s0 =300kN

ANSYS solution for s

:

Fig.15 Circumferential stress contours.

at = 0 , s =126.9kN

at = 90 , s = 338.2kN

which is approximately near the analytical value.

Analytical solution for r :

We know that,

2 2

0

r 2 2

3a a1 1 sin 2

2 r r

at "r" = "a" i.e. at the hole boundary.

r = 0.

ANSYS solution for r:

The value ofr is varying between -0.607 N/mm2

to -25.104N/mm2

near the edge of the

hole. This value is 0.06% of the average value , hence can be treated as zero.


23/26



Fig. 16 Shear stress contours.


24/26



Chapter 4

REFERENCES

1. A. Nau & B. Scholtes, (2012), "Evaluation of the High-Speed Drilling Technique for the

Incremental Hole-Drilling Method", Experimental mechanics, pp.341-353.

2. Abdunur, C., 1993, "Direct access to stresses in concrete and masonry bridges", Proc.

Second International Conference on Bridge Management, University of Surrey, pp 217-

226.

3. ASTM E 837-01e1 Standard Test Methods for Determining Residual Stresses by the

Hole-Drilling Strain Gauge Method. 2008.

4. Beghini, M. and Bertini, L., 1998, Recent Advances in the Hole-Drilling Method for

Residual Stress Measurement,Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, V. 7,No. 2, pp. 163-172.

5. Beghini, M., 2000, Analytical Expression of the Influence Functions for Accuracy and

Versatility Improvement in the Hole-Drilling Method, Journal of Strain Analysis, V. 35,

No. 2, pp. 125-135.

6. Beghini M., 2010, Evaluating non-uniform residual stress by the hole-drilling method

with concentric and eccentric holes. Part II: application of the influence functions to the

inverse problem. Strain 46(4).

7. Cordiano H.V., Salerno V.L., 1969, Study of residual stresses in linearly varying

biaxial-stress fields. Exp Mech 9(1):pp. 1724.

8. GOM International AG, , 2007,"ARAMIS Users Manual", Bremgarterstrasse 89B CH-

8967 Widen, Switzerland.

9. Hak-Chul Shin, Vincent P. Chiarito and Farshad Amini,2010,"Measurements of Strain

Relief in Concrete Cubes with Slot Cutting", Journal of Applied Sciences Research,

6(12), pp.2151-2163.

10.Hammerschmidt S. F., 2008,"Development of a procedure to determine internal stresses

in concrete bridge members, Master of science thesis, Kansas State University.

11.Ismael R. and D. R. Schmitt, 2003, Three-dimensional Stress-relief Displacements from

Blind-hole Drilling: a Parametric Description, Experimental Mechanics, V.43, pp. 52-

59.


25/26



12.Kelsey RA (1956) Measuring non-uniform residual stresses by thehole-drilling method.

SESA Proc 14(1): pp.181194.

13.Lightfoot, E., J., 1965,"Strain Analysis", Vol.1, No.1, pp 27-30,.

14.M. J. Ryall, 1996,"Measurement of stresses in concrete structures using an instrumented

hard-inclusion technique", The Structural Engineer, Volume 74, No 15.

15.McGinnis, M. J.; Pessiki, S.; and Turker, H.,2005, Application of 3D Digital Image

Correlation to the Core-Drilling Method, Experimental Mechanics, V. 45, No. 4, pp.

359-367.

16.McGinnis, M. J., Pessiki, S., 2007, Water-Induced Swelling Displacements in Core

Drilling Method, ACI Materials Journal, V. 104, No. 1, pp. 13-22.

17.McGinnis, M. J., Pessiki, S., and Turker, H. , 2004, "'Application of 3D Image

Correlation Photogrammetry and Classical Photogrammeto to the Core drilling Method

for Measuring In Situ Stresses in Concrete Structures," Report No. 04-16, Center for

Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems, Lehigh University, 50 pp.

18.McGrath P.J, Hattingh DG, James MN, Wedderburn IN, 2002, "A novel 8-element gauge

for residual stress assessment using the high-speed centre hole-drilling method."

SAIMechE Res Dev J 18 (1):16, ISSN 02579669.

19.Mehrkar-Asl, S., 1988, Concrete Stress Relief Coring: Theory and Practice,

Proceedings of the FIP First Symposium on Post Tensioned Concrete Structures, London,

pp. 569-576.

20.Muskhelishvili, N.I. , 1963 Some Basic Problems of the Mathematical Theory of

Elasticity, P.Noordhoff Ltd., Groningen, The Netherlands.

21.Prime, M. B. , 1999 Residual Stress Measurement by Successive Extension of a Slot:

The Crack Compliance Method, Appl. Mech. Rev., 52(2), pp. 75-96.

22.Rendler, N. J., and Vigness, I.,1966 Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method of Measuring

Residual Stresses, Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 6, No. 12, pp. 577586.

23.Sanchez-Beitia S, Schueremans L.,2008 The hole-drilling technique for onsite deduction

of the stresses states in stone masonry by using eight strain gages. Elsevier 23(5):

pp.20412046.

24.Scafidi M, Valentini E, Zuccarello B., 2011Error and uncertainty analysis of the residual

stresses computed by using the hole drilling method. Strain,pp.27-32.
http://public.lanl.gov/prime/crackcmp.pdfhttp://public.lanl.gov/prime/crackcmp.pdfhttp://public.lanl.gov/prime/crackcmp.pdfhttp://public.lanl.gov/prime/crackcmp.pdfhttp://public.lanl.gov/prime/crackcmp.pdf


26/26


25.Schajer, G.S. , 1988 Measurement of Non-uniform Residual Stresses Using the Hole-

Drilling Method, Part I, Transactions of ASME, V. 110, No. 4, pp. 338-343.

26.Schajer, G.S. , 1988 Measurement of Non-uniform Residual Stresses using the Hole-

Drilling Method, Part II, Transactions of ASME, V. 110, No. 4, pp. 344-349..

27.Schmitt, D.R., and Hunt, R. W.,2000 Inversion of Speckle Interferometer Fringes for

Hole-Drilling Residual Stress Determinations, Experimental Mechanics, V.40, pp. 129-

137.

28. Trautner,C.;McGinnis,M.and Pessiki, S., 2010, Analytical and Numerical Development

of the Incremental Core-Drilling Method of Non-Destructive Determination of In-Situ

Stresses in Concrete Structures, Journal of Strain Analysis, V. 45, No. 8, pp. 647-658,.

29.Trautner, C., McGinnis, M., and Pessiki, S., 2010, Application of the Incremental Core

Drilling Method to Determine In-Situ Stresses in Concrete, Accepted by the Materials

Journal of the American Concrete Institute.

30.Trautner, C., McGinnis, M., and Pessiki, S.,2011."The Incremental Core Drilling Method

to Determine In-Situ Stresses in Concrete, Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference

on Experimental and Applied Mechanics,Uncasville, pp. 85-94.

31.Turker, H. and Pessiki, S., 2003, "Theoretical Development of the Core drilling Method

for Non-destructive Evaluation of Stresses in Concrete Structures," Report No. 03-07,

Center for Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems, Lehigh University, pp.

249.

32.http://www.veqter.co.uk/residual-stress-measurement/overview, dated 5/11/2012.

Software package

1. ANSYS version 14.0ANSYS Inc. Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, USA.

report - stage 1 final old

Documents