2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113587
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of strain pre-extrapolation techniques for shape and strain sensing by iFEM of a composite plate subjected to compression buckling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
22
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
“…The most attractive ones including iMIN3 [32], iQS4 [33], and iCS8 [34] inverse-shell elements employ C 0 -continuous interpolation functions in accordance with the firstorder shear deformation theory (FSDT). Particularly, the iQS4 element has recently gained a popularity for shape sensing applications on simple/complex geometries, e.g., ship and offshore structures [35][36][37][38][39] and stiffened aerospace panels [40][41], due to its merits for practical modelling of large-scale structures with low-cost sensor measurement and highly accurate displacement estimations [42][43]. Several studies have shown the superior applications of iFEM/iQS4 approach Coupling of peridynamics and inverse finite element method for shape sensing and crack propagation monitoring of plate structures for damage identification in monolithic/stiffened structures having isotropic/orthotropic material properties [44][45][46][47][48][49].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Inverse finite element (iFEM) method, a novel approach of SHM proposed by Tessler and Spangler [ 24 ], originally employed a three-node inverse-shell element (iMIN3) for the shape sensing of plate structures. iFEM is a strain/displacement based SHM technique which, in contrast to other available SHM methods, is suitable to monitor any displacement of complex topologies and stress fields with intricate boundary conditions by using a network of in situ strain sensors and measured strains [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ]. The advantages of iFEM have recently drawn significant attention since various scientists have attempted to improve the available iFEM equations to achieve better results in the last decade.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%