4.7 Article

Increasing accuracy and precision of digital image correlation through pattern optimization

期刊

OPTICS AND LASERS IN ENGINEERING
卷 91, 期 -, 页码 73-85

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2016.11.005

关键词

Image correlation; Pattern optimization; Pattern quality metrics; 2D full-field measurements

类别

资金

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate through the Digital Twin effort within the Convergent Aeronautics Solutions project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The accuracy and precision of digital image correlation (DIC) is based on three primary components: image acquisition, image analysis, and the subject of the image. Focus on the third component, the image subject, has been relatively limited and primarily concerned with comparing pseudo-random surface patterns. In the current work, a strategy is proposed for the creation of optimal DIC patterns. In this strategy, a pattern quality metric is developed as a combination of quality metrics from the literature rather than optimization based on any single one of them. In this way, optimization produces a pattern which balances the benefits of multiple quality metrics. Specifically, sum of square of subset intensity gradients (SSSIG) was found to be the metric most strongly correlated to DIC accuracy and thus is the main component of the newly proposed pattern quality metric. A term related to the secondary auto-correlation peak height is also part of the proposed quality metric which effectively acts as a constraint upon SSSIG ensuring that a regular (e.g., checkerboard-type) pattern is not achieved. The combined pattern quality metric is used to generate a pattern that was on average 11.6% more accurate than a randomly generated pattern in a suite of numerical experiments. Furthermore, physical experiments were performed which confirm that there is indeed improvement of a similar magnitude in DIC measurements for the optimized pattern compared to a random pattern.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据