2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107486
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A smoothed iFEM approach for efficient shape-sensing applications: Numerical and experimental validation on composite structures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
49
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 92 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
49
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, when dealing with experimental tests, the cost of sensors, acquisition system limitations and physical constraints often limit sensor installation on the whole structure, preventing the full input strain field definition. In this case, the elements free from any sensor can leverage on pre-extrapolated strain measurements, for example, exploiting the Smoothing Element Analysis (SEA) [40,41,[45][46][47][48]. However, since pre-extrapolated strains are reasonably less accurate than sensor's strains, a small weighting coefficient (⋅) will be associated to these elements (e.g., 10 ), while unitary value is assumed for elements including physical sensors.…”
Section: Input Strain Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, when dealing with experimental tests, the cost of sensors, acquisition system limitations and physical constraints often limit sensor installation on the whole structure, preventing the full input strain field definition. In this case, the elements free from any sensor can leverage on pre-extrapolated strain measurements, for example, exploiting the Smoothing Element Analysis (SEA) [40,41,[45][46][47][48]. However, since pre-extrapolated strains are reasonably less accurate than sensor's strains, a small weighting coefficient (⋅) will be associated to these elements (e.g., 10 ), while unitary value is assumed for elements including physical sensors.…”
Section: Input Strain Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, if the sensor network is not optimized for the particular case under analysis, considering all the possible loading conditions, the iFEM may lead to wrong full-field reconstructions. To limit this issue, sensors must accurately describe the structure's strain field, in particular in the load direction, and input strain pre-extrapolation can increase the overall accuracy of the results, as described in [40,41]…”
Section: Input Strain Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It should be noted that an exact inverse is not possible since the fiber strain calculation using Equation (29) is irreversible. Previous studies have proposed the inverse method using least squares for plates [ 16 ], using inverse FEM (iFEM) for shells and plates [ 17 ] and, recently, using inverse IGA-iFEM for shells with strain gauge rosettes [ 36 ]. However, our formulations of integrated IGA and DFOS presented in Section 2 and the following inverse method are substantially different since our method explicitly considers the geometry of the fiber and does not impose any restriction on the location or resolution of sampling points.…”
Section: Estimation Of Boundary Conditions Using Inverse Igamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, there is a gap in information between directly measured strains and the necessary engineering data. The measurement data are usually sparse and limited in terms of type of information, demanding the use of numerical analysis and finite element tools in order to translate data into insights [ 16 , 17 ]. For example, DFOS can be used to obtain distributed strain measurements along the optical fiber, and numerical tools are used to estimate deformation, loading conditions and stress distributions in the structure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%