Sensitivity of inverse boundary element techniques to errors in photoelastic measurements

Authors:
P. Wang;A. A. Becker;I. A. Jones;T. H. Hyde
Affiliations:
School of Mechanical, Materials, Manufacturing Engineering and Management, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom;School of Mechanical, Materials, Manufacturing Engineering and Management, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom;School of Mechanical, Materials, Manufacturing Engineering and Management, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom;School of Mechanical, Materials, Manufacturing Engineering and Management, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
Venue:
ICAAISE '01 Proceedings of the eighth international conference on The application of artificial intelligence to civil and structural engineering computing
Year:
2001

Citing 1
Cited 2

Numerical recipes in FORTRAN (2nd ed.): the art of scientific computing

Numerical recipes in FORTRAN (2nd ed.): the art of scientific computing

Evaluation of inverse boundary element techniques using experimental photoelastic measurements

ICECT'03 Proceedings of the third international conference on Engineering computational technology
Efficient object-oriented implementation of boundary element software

ICAAISE '01 Proceedings of the eighth international conference on The application of artificial intelligence to civil and structural engineering computing

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This paper presents an inverse boundary element (BE) technique to reconstruct the boundary conditions in the unknown regions using photoelastic measurement data regarding the differences of the principal stresses and their orientations at interior points. The separate individual Cartesian stress components are then obtained using the forward BE method. The accuracy of the reconstructed tractions and displacements by using the inverse BE technique depends largely on the errors in the photoelastic measurements. This sensitivity study shows how to choose the number of interior points and their locations, and how to improve the accuracy of the numerical algorithm. Examples show good agreement with other solutions even if up to 5% random 'noise' is added to the photoelastic measurement data.