You are on page 1of 24

IDENTIFICATION OF COHESIVE CRACK FRACTURE PARAMETERS USING MATHEMATICAL PROGRAMMING

by Norbert S. Que

A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Civil and Environmental Engineering

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering The University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia

February, 2003

i

ABSTRACT

This thesis is concerned with the characterisation of the parameters governing the tension-softening relations of the cohesive crack model. Parameter identification is an important area in fracture mechanics as it enables the use of a fracture model for the simulation of fracture processes in structures. Research, however, has shown that such a task is not trivial and continues to pose challenging problems to experimentalists and analysts alike. This dissertation presents general and efficient indirect methods for the characterisation of mode I fracture parameters defining the cohesive crack model.

The identification problem is formulated as a special type of inverse problem. The formulation is in the form of a constrained optimisation problem known as a mathematical program with equilibrium constraints characterised, in the present instance, by complementarity conditions involving the orthogonality of two-sign constrained vectors. The solution of such a mathematical program is computationally challenging as it is disjunctive and nonconvex by nature. A number of nonlinear programming based approaches are proposed, after appropriate reformulation of the mathematical program as an equivalent nonlinear programming problem.

Actual experimental data are used to validate and determine the most suitable algorithm for parameter identification. It was found that the smoothing-based method is by far superior than other schemes. As the problem is nonconvex and the nonlinear program can only guarantee a local or stationary point, global optimisation procedures are introduced in order to verify the accuracy of the solutions obtained by the algorithm.

Two evolutionary search methods capable of finding the global optimum are implemented for parameter identification. The results generated by the evolutionary search techniques confirm the reliability of the solutions identified by the best nonlinear programming algorithm. All computations carried out in the thesis suggest the suitability and robustness of the selected algorithm for parameter identification.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Francis Tin-Loi for without

his support, advice, and guidance it is likely that this thesis would not have been completed. His insights and ideas helped me overcome a number of hurdles in the course of doing this research toward the completion of this thesis. I would also like to thank Dr. John Watson for his insightful discussions on the boundary element method.

I wish to thank the Department of Science and Technology for offering the

scholarship which allowed me take up doctoral studies at the University of New South

Wales, Australia. I also appreciate the support given to me by the University of the Philippines. I would also like to acknowledge the assistance extended to me by Mr. Francois Fernandes.

I am much obliged to my tennis buddies who provided me some helpful diversion from the daily grinds of research. Likewise, to all my friends in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering for their warmth and friendship.

I wish to thank my friends in the Mascot care group for their prayers. I would

also like to extend my gratitude to all my friends at the Punchbowl Baptist Memorial

Church and the Community Bible Church (formerly known as St. Matthias@UNSW).

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my brothers and sisters, most especially my mother and my in-laws in Cebu, for their encouragement.

I am deeply grateful to Carlos and Florence Ringor for their unequivocal support to my family and me. They are our family in Sydney and their friendship and love will always be cherished and remembered.

My gratitude also goes to my lovely wife, Lei, whose understanding, support and patience are instrumental in the completion of this thesis. Of course, doing research and writing this thesis would have been boring if not for my daughter, Yumi, who always knows how to cheer my day up.

Above all, I would like to dedicate this thesis to Jesus Christ for sustaining my family and me all these years. To Him be the glory.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii

NOTATION

x

LIST OF FIGURES

xii

LIST OF TABLES

xx

1

INTRODUCTION

1

1.1 Background

1

1.2 Motivation for the Research

3

1.3 Objectives and Scope of Study

4

1.4 Organisation of the Thesis

5

1.5 Assumptions and Notations

7

1.6 List of Publications

8

2 FRACTURE MECHANICS AND THE COHESIVE CRACK MODEL – A SURVEY

11

2.1 Introduction

11

2.2 A Review of Fracture Mechanics and Quasibrittle Models

12

2.3 A Review of the Cohesive Crack Model

20

2.4 A Review of Direct Methods of Obtaining Cohesive Crack Parameters

27

2.5 A Review of Indirect Methods of Obtaining Cohesive Crack Parameters

36

iv

3 STATE PROBLEM

47

3.1

Introduction

47

3.2

Softening Laws as Complementarity Problems

49

3.2.1 Two-Branch Piecewise Linear Softening Law

55

3.2.2 Three-Branch Piecewise Linear Softening Law

57

3.2.3 Power Softening Law

59

3.2.4 Power-Exponential Softening Law

60

3.3

Structural Discretisation and Modeling

60

3.3.1

BEM – An Overview

62

3.3.2

Two-Zone BEM Formulation

71

3.3.3

Elastic Analysis Using Two-Zone BEM

80

 

- Example 1: cantilever beam

81

- Example 2: three-point bending beam

84

3.4

Formulation of the State Problem

93

3.4.1 MCP and the Path Solver

95

3.4.2 GAMS – A Modelling Environment

97

3.4.3 Computational Examples

102

 

- Example 1: two-branch softening law

103

- Example 2: power softening law

104

3.5

Summary

105

4 PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION: FORMULATION AND NLP SOLUTION APPROACHES

107

4.1 Introduction

107

4.2 Formulation of the Parameter Identification Problem

110

4.3 MPEC – An Overview

114

v

 

4.3.2 Complexity of MPECs

117

 

- Example 1: nonconvexity of MPEC

118

- Example 2: feasible solution set not connected

120

 

4.3.3 Approaches to Solving MPECs

121

4.4

NLP-Based Approaches to the Parameter Identification Problem

122

4.4.1 Algorithm 1: Smoothing

124

4.4.2 Algorithm 2: Penalty

127

4.4.3 Algorithm 3: Relaxation

128

4.4.4 Algorithm 4: Minimise Complementarity

129

4.5

Validation of NLP-Based Algorithms Using Pseudo Data

130

4.5.1

Perfect Pseudo Data

131

 

- Data 1: three-point bend test – ideal data

131

- Data 2: wedge splitting test – ideal data

132

 

4.5.2

Computational Results

134

 

- Problem 1: parameter identification of Data 1

134

- Problem 2: parameter identification of Data 2

136

4.6

Outliers, Noise and the Choice of Error Norm

139

4.6.1 Implementation of Error Norms in the Identification Problem

140

4.6.2 Computational Results

142

 

- Problem 1: comparison of error norms using perfect data set

144

- Problem 2: comparison of error norms using perturbed data set

144

- Problem 3: comparison of error norms using data with outlier

147

4.7

Revalidation of the Proposed Algorithms Using L1 Norm

150

vi

5 IDENTIFICATION USING EXPERIMENTAL DATA AND OTHER METHODS

154

5.1 Introduction

154

5.2 Experimental Data Sets

155

5.2.1 Milan Data

156

5.2.2 LMC/EPFL Data

158

5.2.3 Danish 1 Data

160

5.2.4 Danish 2 Data

161

5.3 Validation of the NLP-Based Algorithms Using Experimental Data

163

5.3.1 Validation 1: Milan Data

163

5.3.2 Validation 2: LMC/EPFL Data

167

5.3.3 Validation 3: Danish 1 Data

172

5.3.4 Validation 4: Danish 2 Data

175

5.3.5 Discussion

178

5.4 Identification of Parameters Characterising Other Softening Laws

178

5.4.1 Parameter Identification of Milan Data Using Other Softening Laws

179

5.4.2 Parameter Identification of LMC/EPFL Data Using Other Softening Laws

182

5.4.3 Parameter Identification of Danish 1 Data Using Other Softening Laws

185

5.4.4 Parameter Identification of Danish 2 Data Using Other Softening Laws

188

5.4.5 Discussion

191

5.5 Time Reduction Techniques for the Parameter Identification Problem

192

5.5.1 Smoothing-Tikhonov Technique

193

5.5.2 Aggregation Technique

196

5.5.3 Presolve Technique

201

-

Milan Data: presolve technique

203

vii

 

-

LMC/EPFL Data: presolve technique

206

 

5.5.4

Iterative Presolve Technique

210

5.6

Summary

 

214

6 EVOLUTIONARY SEARCH METHODS

216

6.1 Introduction

216

6.2 Heuristic Evolutionary Approaches

218

6.3 Genetic Algorithm

220

6.3.1 Solution Representation and Population Size

221

6.3.2 Selection

223

6.3.3 Crossover

225

6.3.4 Mutation

227

6.3.5 Termination

230

6.3.6 Validation

230

- Power Law

231

- Two-branch Law

233

6.4 Differential Evolution

235

6.4.1 Mutation

235

- DE/rand/1

236

- DE/best/1

236

- DE/rand-to-best/1

236

- DE/rand/2

237

- DE/best/2

237

6.4.2 Crossover

237

6.4.3 Selection

238

viii

 

6.4.4 Generation of a Trial Vector

239

6.4.5 DE Control Parameters

239

6.4.6 Validation

241

6.5

Computational Results

244

6.5.1 Parameter Identification of the Milan Data Using GA and DE

245

- Identification of Power Law Parameters

245

- Identification of Two-branch Law Parameters

247

- Identification of Three-branch Law Parameters

249

6.5.2 Parameter Identification of the LMC/EPFL Data Using GA and DE

251

- Identification of Power Law Parameters

251

- Identification of Power-exponential Law Parameters

253

- Identification of Two-branch Law Parameters

257

- Identification of Three-branch Law Parameters

258

6.5.3 Parameter Identification of the Danish 1 Data Using GA and DE

260

- Identification of Power Law Parameters

261

- Identification of Power-exponential Law Parameters

262

- Identification of Two-branch Law Parameters

265

- Identification of Three-branch Law Parameters

267

6.5.4 Parameter Identification of the Danish 2 Data Using GA and DE

270

- Identification of Power Law Parameters

270

- Identification of Two-branch Law Parameters

271

- Identification of Three-branch Law Parameters

273

6.5.5 Discussion

275

ix

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

278

7.1 Concluding Remarks

278

7.2 Recommendations for Future Studies

280

REFERENCES

282

x

NOTATION

The following are the common symbols used in this thesis.

CR

crossover factor used in differential evolution

D

size of parameter vector

e

vector of ones

E

Young’s modulus

f

nonnegative vector interpreted as the activation function

f

t

tensile strength

F

mutation factor used in differential evolution

G

current generation

G

F

fracture energy

h ,h ,h

1

2

J

L

1

L

2

L

1

L

2

L

p

N

p

r

t

t

t

c

t

a

,t

b

3

actual slope of the softening branches

set of all measurements

least-absolute norm

least square norm

norm of L 1 and L 2 difference

least-power norm

size of population

point load

influence vector obtainable as a by-product of the computational model

normal traction at the crack interface

vector of normal tractions at the crack interface

tensile strength

breakpoint strength

t

e vector of elastic tractions at the crack interface due to externally applied actions

xi

w crack width w vector of displacement discontinuities at the crack interface w critical crack
w
crack width
w
vector of displacement discontinuities at the crack interface
w
critical crack width
c
z
nonnegative
vector
interpreted
as
crack
opening
displacements
Z
influence matrix interpreted as the normal tractions caused
by unit crack openings in the otherwise unloaded structure
boundary surface
locus of potential crack discontinuity
c
(w)
nonlinear softening curve equation
modulus of rupture
u
Poisson’s ratio
objective function, error norm or identified error
ˆ
real error
boundary domain

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 1.1

Linear softening law

2

Figure 2.1

Relative sizes of the fracture process zone for (a) brittle, (b) ductile, (c) quasibrittle materials.

14

Figure 2.2

A generic nonlinear softening curve.

16

Figure 2.3

Piecewise linear stress-strain curve for the crack band model.

17

Figure 2.4

Definition of the two-parameter fracture model.

18

Figure 2.5

Size effect law as defined in Equation (2.5).

20

Figure 2.6

Dugdale’s plastic zone model.

21

Figure 2.7

Stress-deformation behaviour of a quasibrittle specimen in tension.

22

Figure 2.8

Definition of the cohesive crack model.

24

Figure 2.9

A schematic illustration of a uniaxial tensile test.

28

Figure 2.10

A schematic illustration of a tensile splitting test.

31

Figure 2.11

Illustration of a three-point bend test.

32

Figure 2.12

Work of fracture as an area in the load-displacement (p- ) curve.

33

Figure 2.13

Common wedge splitting shapes (a) cubical

– mould

fabricated, (b) and (c) cylindrical – cored from existing structures (Brühwiler and Wittmann, 1990).

34

Figure 2.14

Schematic illustration of a wedge splitting test (Brühwiler and Wittmann, 1990).

35

Figure 3.1

Holonomic two-branch softening law (Bolzon et al., 1994).

51

Figure 3.2

Definition of a two-branch softening law using actual slopes (Tin-Loi and Xia, 2001).

54

Figure 3.3

Definition of a nonlinear softening curve.

55

Figure 3.4

Definition of a three-branch softening law using actual slopes.

58

xiii

Figure No.

Title

 

Page

Figure 3.6

Representation of a 2D body bounded by boundary .

 

64

Figure 3.7

Definition of the displacement response due to a unit load applied in the X1 direction.

66

Figure 3.8

Convention for local axis interface system.

 

72

Figure 3.9

Node numbering scheme for zones 1 and 2. 72

Figure 3.10

Physical

interpretation

for

the

determination

of

the

Z

matrix.

79

Figure 3.11

Cantilever beam problem.

 

81

Figure 3.12

Figure 3.13

Cantilever beam under transverse parabolic load at both ends.

Comparison of stress results at section A-A as predicted by beam theory and two-zone BEM with 14 (total) quadratic elements.

82

83

Figure 3.14

Comparison of stress results at section A-A as predicted by beam theory and two-zone BEM with 28 (total) quadratic elements.

85

Figure 3.15

Geometry of a typical three-point bending beam.

 

85

Figure 3.16

Discretisation of a two-zone BEM using 16 elements on each zone.

88

Figure 3.17

Comparison of normal stresses at section A-B obtained BEM(16x16x2), exact solution and approximate solution. 89

Figure 3.18

Illustration of local stress disturbance due to an abrupt change of length in the adjacent element.

90

Figure 3.19

Comparison of normal stresses at section A-B obtained from BEM(63x63x20), exact solution and approximate solution.

91

Figure 3.20

Distribution of normal stresses at section A-B as predicted by two-zone BEM and FEM.

92

Figure 3.21

GAMS coding of the state problem (3.74).

 

100

Figure 3.22

Geometry of notched three-point bend specimen.

102

Figure 3.23

Two-branch softening law for example 1. 103

Figure 3.24

Softening response of example 1 using two-branch law.

 

104

xiv

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 4.1

Diagram of the feasible solution space for Example 4.1.

 

118

Figure 4.2

Plot of the value of the objective function along the x-axis

 

119

Figure 4.3

Diagram of the feasible solution space for Example 4.2.

 

120

Figure 4.4

Smoothing of complementarity conditions.

 

126

Figure 4.5

Three-point bend model used to generate the pseudo data.

 

131

Figure 4.6

Perfect pseudo data points generated from a three-point bend model.

132

Figure 4.7

Wedge splitting model used to generate the pseudo data.

 

133

Figure 4.8

Perfect pseudo data points generated from a wedge splitting model.

133

Figure 4.9

Data

1:

comparison

of

predicted

with

actual

p

u

responses.

 

136

Figure 4.10

Data

2:

comparison

of

predicted

with

actual

p

u

responses.

 

138

Figure 4.11

Data 2: details of p – u responses at the peak load.

 

138

Figure 4.12

Perturbed data set.

 

143

Figure 4.13

Data set with outlier.

144

Figure 4.14

Perfect data: comparison of predicted with actual p – u response.

145

Figure 4.15

Perturbed data: comparison of predicted with actual p – u response.

146

Figure 4.16

Perturbed data: details of p – u responses at the peak load.

 

147

Figure 4.17

Identified p – u response for a data with outlier using L 1 L 2 norm.

148

Figure 4.18

Data with outlier: comparison of predicted with actual p –u response.

149

Figure 4.19

Figure 5.1

Data with outlier: details of p – u responses at the peak load.

Milan three-point bend test showing grid points where horizontal displacements are measured.

149

156

Figure 5.2

Dimensions for the structural model of Milan three-point bend test.

157

xv

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 5.3

Plot of the 48 recorded data points and the chosen subset of 32 data points for the Milan three-point bend test.

157

Figure 5.5

Plot of the 128 recorded data points of the LMC/EPFL wedge splitting test.

159

Figure 5.6

Plot of the 128 recorded data points and the chosen subset of 32 data points for the LMC/EPFL wedge splitting test. 160

Figure 5.7

Dimensions for the structural model of Danish three-point

Data points for the three-point bend test Danish normal

Figure 5.8

bend test.

strength concrete.

161

162

Figure 5.9

Data points for the three-point bend test Danish high strength concrete.

162

Figure 5.10

Milan data: comparison of predicted with actual p u responses.

165

Figure 5.11

Milan data: details of p –u responses at the peak load.

166

Figure 5.12

Milan data: two-branch softening laws determined by the NLP-based algorithms.

166

Figure 5.13

LMC/EPFL data: comparison of predicted with actual p u responses.

169

Figure 5.14

LMC/EPFL data: details of p – u responses at the peak load.

169

Figure 5.15

LMC/EPFL data: two-branch softening laws determined by the NLP-based algorithms.

170

Figure 5.16

LMC/EPFL data: comparison of p – u curves predicted by the smoothing and penalty algorithms.

171

Figure 5.17

LMC/EPFL data: two-branch softening laws determined by smoothing and penalty algorithms.

171

Figure 5.18

Danish 1 data: comparison of predicted with actual p u responses.

173

Figure 5.19

Danish 1 data: two-branch softening laws determined by the NLP-based algorithms.

174

Figure 5.20

Danish 1 data: details of p –u responses at the peak load.

174

Figure 5.21

Danish 2 data: comparison of predicted with actual p u responses.

176

xvi

Figure No.

Title

 

Page

Figure 5.23

Danish 2 data: two-branch softening laws determined by the NLP-based algorithms.

177

Figure 5.24

Milan data: predicted p u responses of various softening laws.

181

Figure 5.25

Milan data: details of p –u curves at the peak load.

 

181

Figure 5.26

Milan data: identified softening curves associated with the softening laws.

182

Figure 5.27

LMC/EPFL data: predicted p u responses of various softening laws.

184

Figure 5.28

LMC/EPFL data: identified softening curves associated with the softening laws.

186

Figure 5.29

Danish

1

data:

predicted

p

u

responses

of

various

softening laws.

 

187

Figure 5.30

Danish 1 data: details of p –u curves at the peak load.

188

Figure 5.31

Danish 1 data: identified softening curves associated with the softening laws.

189

Figure 5.32

Danish 2 data: identified softening curves associated with the softening laws.

190

Figure 5.33

Danish 2 data: details of p –u curves at the peak load.

191

Figure 5.34

Milan data: identified pu responses of smoothing and smoothing-Tikhonov algorithms for a three-branch law.

195

Figure 5.35

Milan data: identified three-branch law for smoothing and smoothing-Tikhonov algorithms.

196

Figure 5.36

Milan data: identified pu responses of smoothing and Aggregation techniques for a two-branch law.

200

Figure 5.37

Milan data: identified pu responses of smoothing and Aggregation techniques for a three-branch law.

201

Figure 5.38

Chosen subset in Milan data for the Presolve technique.

203

Figure 5.39

Milan data: identified pu responses of smoothing and Presolve techniques for a three-branch law.

205

Figure 5.40

Chosen

subset

in

LMC/EPFL

data

for

the

Presolve

technique.

 

206

Figure 5.41

LMC/EPFL data: identified pu responses of smoothing and Presolve techniques for a two-branch law.

207

xvii

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 5.42

LMC/EPFL data: identified pu responses of smoothing and Presolve techniques for a three-branch law. 208

Figure 5.43

LMC/EPFL data: identified three-branch law for the smoothing algorithm and the Presolve technique.

209

Figure 5.44

Milan data: identified pu responses of smoothing and iterative Presolve techniques for a three-branch law. 212

Figure 5.45

LMC/EPFL data: identified pu responses of smoothing and iterative Presolve techniques for a two-branch law. 213

Figure 6.1

Pseudo data: GA iteration history of the power law.

232

Figure 6.2

Pseudo data: fitness contour of the power law.

233

Figure 6.3

Pseudo data: fitness landscape of the power law.

233

Figure 6.4

Pseudo data: GA iteration history of the two-branch law.

234

Figure 6.5

DE procedure in generating a trial vector.

240

Figure 6.6

Pseudo data: iteration histories for DE/best/2/bin and DE/best/2/exp strategies using a two-branch law.

243

Figure 6.7

Pseudo data: DE iteration history of the power law.

244

Figure 6.8

Milan data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power law.

246

Figure 6.9

Milan data: fitness contour of the power law.

247

Figure 6.10

Milan data: fitness landscape of the power law.

248

Figure 6.11

Milan data: GA and DE iteration histories of the two- branch law.

249

Figure 6.12

Milan data: identified p-u responses of smoothing, GA and DE methods for a three-branch law.

250

Figure 6.13

Milan data: identified three-branch law for smoothing, GA and DE methods.

251

Figure 6.14

Figure 6.15

Milan data: GA and DE iteration histories of the three- branch law.

LMC/EPFL data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power law.

252

253

Figure 6.16

LMC/EPFL data: fitness contour of the power law.

254

Figure 6.17

LMC/EPFL data: fitness landscape of the power law.

254

Figure 6.18

LMC/EPFL data: fitness contour of the power-exponential law.

255

xviii

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 6.19

LMC/EPFL

data:

fitness

landscape

of

the

power-

exponential law.

 

256

Figure 6.20

LMC/EPFL data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power-exponential law.

256

Figure 6.21

LMC/EPFL data: GA and DE iteration histories of the two- branch law.

258

Figure 6.22

LMC/EPFL data: GA and DE iteration histories of the three-branch law.

259

Figure 6.23

LMC/EPFL data: identified p-u responses of smoothing, GA and DE methods for a three-branch law.

260

Figure 6.24

LMC/EPFL

data:

identified

three-branch

 

law

for

smoothing, GA and DE methods.

 

261

Figure 6.25

Danish 1 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power law.

262

Figure 6.26

Danish 1 data: fitness contour of the power law.

 

263

Figure 6.27

Danish 1 data: fitness landscape of the power law.

 

263

Figure 6.28

Danish 1 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power- exponential law.

264

Figure 6.29

Danish 1 data: fitness contour of the power-exponential law.

265

Figure 6.30

Danish 1 data: fitness landscape of the power-exponential law.

265

Figure 6.31

Danish 1 data: identified p-u responses of smoothing, GA and DE methods for a two-branch law.

266

Figure 6.32

Danish 1 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the two- branch law.

267

Figure 6.33

Danish 1 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the three- branch law.

268

Figure 6.34

Danish 1 data: identified p-u responses of smoothing, GA and DE methods for a three-branch law.

269

Figure 6.35

Danish 1 data: identified three-branch law for smoothing,

Danish 2 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the power

Figure 6.36

GA and DE methods.

law.

269

271

xix

Figure No.

Title

Page

Figure 6.38

Danish 2 data: fitness landscape of the power law.

272

Figure 6.39

Danish 2 data: GA and DE iteration histories of the two- branch law.

273

Figure 6.40

Danish 2 data: identified p-u responses of smoothing, GA and DE methods for a three-branch law.

274

Figure 6.41

Danish 2 data: identified three-branch law for smoothing, GA and DE methods.

275

xx

LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

Title

Table 3.1

Stress and displacement values of a cantilever beam obtained from beam theory and 14-element two-zone BEM analysis.

Table 3.2

Stress and displacement values of a cantilever beam obtained from refined two-zone BEM discretisation.

Table 3.3 values for the exact and the approximate solutions.

Table 3.4

Table 3.5

Table 3.6

Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Table 4.3

Table 4.4

Table 4.5

Table 4.6

Table 4.7

Table 4.8

Table 4.9

x

values

solutions.

obtained

using

the

exact

and

approximate

x values for BEM(16x16x2) compared with the values

predicted using the exact and approximate solutions.

Comparison of

solutions.

x values for the exact and approximate

Results

least-

squares norm.

Updated results of the parameter identification of Data 1 for

different

squares norm.

algorithms using standard least-

different

for

of

the

parameter

identification

using

of

Data

1

NLP-based

NLP-based

algorithms

standard

Parameter

identification

of

Data

2

using

different

algorithms.

Commonly used robust estimators.

Results of the parameter identification of perfect data using different error norms.

Results of the parameter identification of perturbed data using different error norms.

Results of the parameter identification of data with outlier using different error norms.

Results of the parameter identification of Data 1 using L 1 norm.

Results of the parameter identification of Data 2 using L 1 norm.

Page

83

84

87

87

89

91

134

135

137

140

145

146

148

151

151

xxi

Table No.

Title

Page

Table 5.1

Settings of NLP-based algorithms for Milan data.

 

164

Table 5.2

Results of parameter identification of Milan data using different NLP-based algorithms.

165

Table 5.3

Settings of NLP-based algorithms for LMC/EPFL data.

 

168

Table 5.4

Results of parameter identification of LMC/EPFL data using different NLP-based algorithms.

168

Table 5.5

Settings of NLP-based algorithms for Danish 1 data.

 

172

Table 5.6

Results of parameter identification of Danish 1 data for different NLP-based algorithms.

172

Table 5.7

Settings of NLP-based algorithms for Danish 2 data.

 

175

Table 5.8

Results of parameter identification of Danish 2 data for different NLP-based algorithms.

176

Table 5.9

Identified

parameters

of different

softening laws

using

Milan data.

180

Table 5.10

Other information related to the parameter identification of Milan data.

180

Table 5.11

Identified

parameters

of different

softening laws

using

LMC/EPFL data.

183

Table 5.12

Information

related

to

the

parameter

identification

of

LMC/EPLF data.

 

183

Table 5.13

Identified

parameters

of different

softening laws

using

Danish 1 data.

186

Table 5.14

Information

related

to

the

parameter

identification

of

Danish 1 data.

187

Table 5.15

Identified

parameters

of different

softening laws

using

Danish 2 data.

189

Table 5.16

Other information related to the parameter identification of Danish 2 data.

191

Table 5.17

Milan data: comparison of results for a two-branch law between smoothing and smoothing-Tikhonov algorithms. 194

Table 5.18

Milan data: comparison of results for a three-branch law between smoothing and smoothing-Tikhonov algorithms. 195

Table 5.19

Milan

data:

identification

results

using

Aggregation

 

technique for a two-branch law.

199

xxii

Table No.

Title

Page

Table 5.20

Milan

data:

identification

results

using

Aggregation

technique for a three-branch law.

 

200

Table 5.21

Milan data: identification results using Presolve technique for a two-branch law.

204

Table 5.22

Milan data: identification results using Presolve technique for a three-branch law.

204

Table 5.23

Milan data: identification results using Presolve technique for power law.

205

Table 5.24

LMC/EPFL

data:

identification

results

using

Presolve

technique for a two-branch law.

 

207

Table 5.25

LMC/EPFL

data:

identification

results

using

Presolve

technique for a three-branch law.

 

208

Table 5.26

LMC/EPFL

data:

identification

results

using

Presolve

technique for power law.

 

210

Table 5.27

LMC/EPFL

data:

identification

results

using

Presolve

technique for power-exponential law.

 

210

Table 5.28

Milan

data:

identification

results

using

the

iterative

Presolve technique for a three-branch law.

 

211

Table 5.29

LMC/EPFL data: identification results using the iterative Presolve technique for a two-branch law.

213

Table 6.1

Settings of the crossover operators used in GAOT.

 

228

Table 6.2

Settings of the mutation operators used in GAOT.

229

Table 6.3

Pseudo data: identification of the power law using GA.

231

Table 6.4

Pseudo data: identification of the two-branch law using GA.

234

Table 6.5

Pseudo data: two-branch law parameters identified using different DE strategies.

242

Table 6.6

Pseudo data: identification of the power law using DE.

243

Table 6.7

Milan data: identification of the power law using GA and DE.

245

Table 6.8

Milan data: identification of the two-branch law using GA and DE.

248

Table 6.9

Milan data: identification of the three-branch law using GA and DE.

250

xxiii

Table No.

Title

Page

Table 6.10

LMC/EPFL data: identification of the power law using GA and DE.

252

Table 6.11

LMC/EPFL data: identification of the power-exponential

LMC/EPFL data: identification of the two-branch law using

Table 6.12

law using GA and DE.

GA and DE.

255

257

Table 6.13

LMC/EPFL data: identification of the three-branch law using GA and DE.

258

Table 6.14

Danish 1 data: identification of the power law using GA and DE.

261

Table 6.15

Danish 1 data: identification of the power-exponential law

LMC/EPFL data: identification of the two-branch law using

Table 6.16

using GA and DE.

GA and DE.

264

266

Table 6.17

Danish 1 data: identification of the three-branch law using GA and DE.

268

Table 6.18

Danish 2 data: identification of the power law using GA and DE.

270

Table 6.19

Danish 2 data: identification of the two-branch law using GA and DE.

272

Table 6.20

Danish 2 data: identification of the three-branch law using GA and DE.

274