4.5 Article

Assessment of Digital Image Correlation Measurement Errors: Methodology and Results

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 353-370

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11340-008-9204-7

关键词

Digital image correlation; Error assessment; Spatial resolution; Displacement resolution; Uncertainty assessment; Benchmark; Speckle pattern; Texture

资金

  1. CNRS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Optical full-field measurement methods such as Digital Image Correlation (DIC) are increasingly used in the field of experimental mechanics, but they still suffer from a lack of information about their metrological performances. To assess the performance of DIC techniques and give some practical rules for users, a collaborative work has been carried out by the Workgroup Metrology of the French CNRS research network 2519 MCIMS (Mesures de Champs et Identification en M,canique des Solides / Full-field measurement and identification in solid mechanics, http://www.ifma.fr/lami/gdr2519. A methodology is proposed to assess the metrological performances of the image processing algorithms that constitute their main component, the knowledge of which being required for a global assessment of the whole measurement system. The study is based on displacement error assessment from synthetic speckle images. Series of synthetic reference and deformed images with random patterns have been generated, assuming a sinusoidal displacement field with various frequencies and amplitudes. Displacements are evaluated by several DIC packages based on various formulations and used in the French community. Evaluated displacements are compared with the exact imposed values and errors are statistically analyzed. Results show general trends rather independent of the implementations but strongly correlated with the assumptions of the underlying algorithms. Various error regimes are identified, for which the dependence of the uncertainty with the parameters of the algorithms, such as subset size, gray level interpolation or shape functions, is discussed.

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

4.5
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