MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087514346

Assessment of Fibre Optic Sensor Architectures for Structural Health Monitoring

2013· article· en· W3087514346 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
B. Rocha, Darun Barazanchy, Ruben Sevenois, Honglei Guo, Gaozhi Xiao, Nezih Mrad

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural health monitoringMaterials scienceFiber Bragg gratingPhotodiodeOptical fiberEMIFiber optic sensorAcousticsGuided wave testingInterference (communication)BroadbandOptoelectronicsOpticsElectromagnetic interferenceElectronic engineeringComputer scienceFiberTelecommunicationsEngineeringComposite material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fibre Optic Sensors (FOS) present several advantages over their conventional electrical counterparts for Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) of aerospace structures. These sensors are dimensionally small and can be readily embedded into composite structures, or bonded to their surface with minimal effect on weight or aerodynamic characteristics. They also do not generate, and are immune, to Electro-Magnetic Interference (EMI), thus they do not affect neighboring electrical systems or avionics. Fiber Optic Sensors have been widely used for load monitoring in discrete or distributed architectures. Additionally, Fibre Bragg Grating (FBG) sensors, a family of FOS, have been explored for the detecti on of material acoustic waves and damage. Three sensing system configurations, coupled with the use of FBGs, have been studied and reported in the literature for the detection of material acoustic waves; namely, (1) the use of tunable lasers as light source and photodiodes as the light sensors; (2) Broad Band light Sources (BBS) and Arrayed Waveguide Gratings (AWG); and (3) BBS with cascaded, or pairs of phase-shifted FBGs. The first two configurations also offer the ability to perform load monitoring, through strain measurement, in addition to material acoustic wave and damage detection. In an effort to advance the field of Structural Health Monitoring and its implementation in aircraft applications, these three sensing system architectures were evaluated for their capability and ease for the detection of material acoustic waves and damage. Tests were performed using a realistic and aircraft representative skin composite panel, a quasi-isotropic Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) skin panel. In the performed evaluati on, material acoustic waves generated by a piezoceramic transducer were accurately and reliably detected using the first (1) and last (3) techni ques. The first architecture was implemented effortlessly and the last presented, inherently, less complexity. The use of the AWG, in the second (2) architecture, presented comparativel y additional challenges to the detection of the generated acoustic waves due to the requirement for a high power light source. As a result of this evaluati on, the first (1) technique was subsequently selected and assessed in damage detection trials with promising results. Due to the demonstrated success of these trials, the experimental composite skin panel, along with the demonstrated damage detecti on technique, are being integrated into the SHM infrastructure being developed at the National Research Council Canada (NRC). This infrastructure consists of structural platforms that range in complexity from a simple 2 m long aluminium beam to full scale aircraft structures - a CF188 wing and a Bell 206 helicopter tail boom. Additionally, such infrastructure offers full scale evaluations and testing of damage detection techniques and technologies and SHM capabilities employing realistic loads and spectra optionally in varying environment conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207