4.7 Article

Assessment of speckle-pattern quality in digital image correlation based on gray intensity and speckle morphology

Journal

OPTICS AND LASERS IN ENGINEERING
Volume 91, Issue -, Pages 62-72

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2016.11.001

Keywords

Speckle-pattern quality; Digital image correlation; Deformation measurement; Gray intensity; Speckle morphology

Categories

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Programthrough the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [NRF2015R1C1A1A02037663]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In digital image correlation (DIC), speckle patterns are generated on the surface of a specimen to resolve uniqueness issues. Thus, speckle patterns significantly affect the accuracy of image correlation. To assess the quality of speckle patterns, the standard deviation of gray intensities within each speckle (SDGIS) is introduced as a new metric. On the basis of the cumulative distribution of SDGIS, speckle-pattern quality measurement (p) is proposed, which integrates the features of gray intensity and speckle morphology. Twelve speckle patterns are generated by changing the spraying time and nozzle sizes of an airbrush because these are associated with the speckle volume fraction and speckle size, respectively. In addition, three displacement fields are used to investigate the effects of speckle patterns on the accuracy of the DIC results. For the 12 speckle images associated with the three displacement fields, the correlation results demonstrate that the proposed speckle pattern quality measurement is inversely proportional to the averaged error of the subset method. This is statistically confirmed by evaluating the correlation coefficient and p-value. Furthermore, the error of the subset method is more affected by speckle patterns than the subset size when the subset size is sufficiently large.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available