On the integration of validation, quality assurance and non-destructive evaluation

Abstract

Experimental strain analysis, structural health monitoring and non-destructive testing and evaluation are regarded as separate disciplines that, in general, are deployed independently at different phases in the life cycle of an engineering component, i.e. in the design process, in service and after an event or service period, respectively. It is proposed that the integrated use of these three disciplines is advantageous and beneficial in terms of reduced capital and operational costs for critical and safety-relevant components, as well as, in validating simulations, in both quantifying and reducing risk of unexpected failure, and in estimating remanent life. We propose the foundation of this integration to be data-rich strain fields measured and compared quantitatively, with each other and with data from simulations, at temporal intervals during the life of a component.

Towards Automated Tracking of Initiation and Propagation of Cracks in Aluminium Alloy Coupons Using Thermoelastic Stress Analysis

“…Full-field methods, such as DIC or ESPI, remove the need for prior knowledge of potential crack sites as they can be used to observe larger areas. However, the complicated surface preparation (DIC) or complicated equipment (ESPI) required do not make these techniques ideal for inspections on a short timescale, or for in-service monitoring [4]. Thermoelastic stress analysis (TSA) is an alternative full-field method which requires only that the surface has a uniform high emissivity.…”

A hysteretic multiscale formulation for validating computational models of heterogeneous structures

“…Equations (9) and (10) imply that during unloading the material stiffness is constant and equal to the elastic one.…”

“…where E hm(i) is the hysteretic energy of the ith microelement. Solving equation (9) for f _ e el g and substituting into equation (21), the following relation is finally derived…”

“…If the reduced order model successfully reproduces the desired response with a sufficient level of accuracy, lying below some acceptable threshold, it may then be adopted for the forward simulation of the system at hand. The second route, which is invaluable within the context of standardization of the validation approach, is through experimental validation as noted in Patterson et al, 9 Felipe-Sesé et al 10 and Burguete et al 11 This route relies on the use of actual structural feedback, that is, through experimental or field measurements of structural response under static or dynamic loads.…”

Shape descriptors and mapping methods for full-field comparison of experimental to simulation data

“…Often the comparison is even restricted to a single point where the maximum stress occurs. This highly localized approach is the result of the traditional strain measurement approaches performed by strain gauges, but neglects the majority of data generated by numerical analysis and full-field measurement techniques, carrying with it the risk that critical regions may be missed all together [1].…”