Advertisement

A Robust-to-Noise Deconvolution Algorithm to Enhance Displacement and Strain Maps Obtained with Local DIC and LSA

  • M. GrédiacEmail author
  • B. Blaysat
  • F. Sur
Article
  • 80 Downloads

Abstract

Digital Image Correlation (DIC) and Localized Spectrum Analysis (LSA) are two techniques available to extract displacement fields from images of deformed surfaces marked with contrasted patterns. Both techniques consist in minimizing the optical residual. DIC performs this minimization iteratively in the real domain on random patterns such as speckles. LSA performs this minimization nearly straightforwardly in the Fourier domain on periodic patterns such as grids or checkerboards. The particular case of local DIC performed pixelwise is considered here. In this case and regardless of noise, local DIC and LSA both provide displacement fields equal to the actual one convolved by a kernel known a priori. The kernel corresponds indeed to the Savitzky-Golay filter in local DIC, and to the analysis window of the windowed Fourier transform used in LSA. Convolution reduces the noise level, but it also causes actual details in displacement and strain maps to be returned with a damped amplitude, thus with a systematic error. In this paper, a deconvolution method is proposed to retrieve the actual displacement and strain fields from their counterparts given by local DIC or LSA. The proposed algorithm can be considered as an extension of Van Cittert deconvolution, based on the small strain assumption. It is demonstrated that it allows enhancing fine details in displacement and strain maps, while improving the spatial resolution. Even though noise is amplified after deconvolution, the present procedure can be considered as robust to noise, in the sense that off-the-shelf deconvolution algorithms do not converge in the presence of classic levels of noise observed in strain maps. The sum of the random and systematic errors is also lower after deconvolution, which means that the proposed procedure improves the compromise between spatial resolution and measurement resolution. Numerical and real examples considering deformed speckle images (for DIC) and checkerboard images (for LSA) illustrate the efficiency of the proposed approach.

Keywords

Checkerboard Digital image correlation Displacement Deconvolution Full-field measurement Grid method Localized spectrum analysis Metrology Periodic pattern Speckle Strain 

References

  1. 1.
    Réthoré J (2010) A fully integrated noise robust strategy for the identification of constitutive laws from digital images. Int J Numer Methods Eng 84(6):631–660zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schreier HW, Sutton M (2002) Systematic errors in digital image correlation due to undermatched subset shape functions. Exp Mech 42(3):303–310Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Savitzky A, Golay MJE (1964) Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least-squares procedures. Anal Chem 36(3):1627–1639Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sur F, Grédiac M (2014) Towards deconvolution to enhance the grid method for in-plane strain measurement. Inverse Probl Imaging 8(1):259–291. American Institute of Mathematical SciencesMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grédiac M, Blaysat B, Sur F (2017) A critical comparison of some metrological parameters characterizing local digital image correlation and grid method. Exp Mech 57(3):871–903Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sutton M, Orteu JJ, Schreier H (2009) Image Correlation for Shape, Motion and Deformation Measurements. Basic Concepts, Theory and Applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pan B, Lu Z, Xie H (2010) Mean intensity gradient: an effective global parameter for quality assessment of the speckle patterns used in digital image correlation. Opt Lasers Eng 48(4):469–77Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Neggers J, Blaysat B, Hoefnagels JPM, Geers MGD (2016) On image gradients in digital image correlation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 105(4):243–260MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Surrel Y, Zhao B (1994) Simultaneous u-v displacement field measurement with a phase-shifting grid method. In: Stupnicki J, Pryputniewicz RJ (eds) Proceedings of the SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering, vol 2342. SPIEGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bomarito GF, Hochhalter JD, Ruggles TJ, Cannon AH (2017) Increasing accuracy and precision of digital image correlation through pattern optimization. Opt Lasers Eng 91:73–85Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hytch MJ, Snoeck E, Kilaas R (1998) Quantitative measurement of displacement and strain fields from HREM micrographs. Ultramicroscopy 74:131–146Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhu RH, Xie H, Dai X, Zhu J, Jin A (2014) Residual stress measurement in thin films using a slitting method with geometric phase analysis under a dual beam (fib/sem) system. Measur Sci Technol 25(9):095003Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dai X, Xie H, Wang H, Li C, Liu Z, Wu L (2014) The geometric phase analysis method based on the local high resolution discrete Fourier transform for deformation measurement. Measur Sci Technol 25(2):025402Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dai X, Xie H, Wang H (2014) Geometric phase analysis based on the windowed Fourier transform for the deformation field measurement. Opt Laser Technol 58(6):119–127Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grédiac M, Sur F, Blaysat B (2016) The grid method for in-plane displacement and strain measurement: a review and analysis. Strain 52(3):205–243Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kemao Q (2004) Windowed Fourier transform for fringe pattern analysis. Appl Opt 43(13):2695–2702Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kemao Q, Wang H, Gao W (2010) Windowed fourier transform for fringe pattern analysis: theoretical analyses. Appl Opt 47(29):5408–5419Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grédiac M, Blaysat B, Sur F (2018) Extracting displacement and strain fields from checkerboard images with the localized spectrum analysis. Exp Mech. AcceptedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sur F, Grédiac M (2016) Influence of the analysis window on the metrological performance of the grid method. J Math Imaging Vis 56(3):472–498MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Starck JL, Pantin E, Murtagh F (2002) Deconvolution in astronomy: a review. Publ Astron Soc Pac 114(800):1051–1069Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2006) Digital Image Processing, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grédiac M, Sur F, Badulescu C, Mathias J-D (2013) Using deconvolution to improve the metrological performance of the grid method. Opt Lasers Eng 51(6):716–734Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murtagh F, Pantin E, Starck J-L (2007) Deconvolution and blind deconvolution in astronomy. In: Campisi P, Egiazarian K (eds) Blind image deconvolution: theory and applications. Taylor and Francis, pp 277–316Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sagaut P (2002) Structural modeling. In: Large Eddy simulation for incompressible flows: an introduction. Springer, Berlin, pp 183–240Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sur F, Blaysat B, Grédiac M (2018) Rendering deformed speckle images with a Boolean model. J Math Imaging Vis 60(5):634–650MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reu P (2014) All about speckles: Aliasing. Exp Tech 38(5):1–3Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grédiac M, Sur F (2014) Effect of sensor noise on the resolution and spatial resolution of the displacement and strain maps obtained with the grid method. Strain 50(1):1–27. Paper invited for the 50th anniversary of the journalGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lehoucq RB, Reu PL, Turner DZ (2017) The effect of the ill-posed problem on quantitative error assessment in digital image correlation. Experimental Mechanics, Accepted, onlineGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schafer RW (2011) What is a Savitzky-Golay filter? (lecture notes). IEEE Signal Proc Mag 28(4):111–117Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grafarend EW (2006) Linear and nonlinear models: Fixed Effects, Random Effects, and Mixed Models. Walter de Gruyter, RoslynGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Piro JL, Grédiac M (2004) Producing and transferring low-spatial-frequency grids for measuring displacement fields with moiré and grid methods. Exp Tech 28(4):23–26Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sur F, Blaysat B, Grédiac M (2016) Determining displacement and strain maps immune from aliasing effect with the grid method. Opt Lasers Eng 86:317–328Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pierron F, Grédiac M (2012) The virtual fields method. Springer, Berlin. 517 pages, ISBN 978-1-4614-1823-8zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Richardson WH (1972) Bayesian-based iterative method of image restoration. J Opt Soc Am 62(1):55–59MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lucy LB (1974) An iterative technique for the rectification of observed distributions. Astron J 79(6):745–754Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    International vocabulary of metrology. Basic and general concepts and associated terms (2008) Third editionGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chrysochoos A, Surrel Y (2012) Chapter 1. Basics of metrology and introduction to techniques Grédiac M, Hild F (eds), WileyGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bornert M, Brémand F, Doumalin P, Dupré J-c, Fazzini M, Grédiac M, Hild F, Mistou S, Molimard J, Orteu J-J, Robert L, Surrel Y, Vacher P, Wattrisse B (2009) Assessment of digital image correlation measurement errors: methodology and results. Exper Mech 49(3):353–370Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wittevrongel L, Lava P, Lomov SV, Debruyne D (2015) A self adaptive global digital image correlation algorithm. Exp Mech 55(2):361–378Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Blaber J, Adair B, Antoniou A (2015) Ncorr: open-source 2d digital image correlation matlab software. Experimental Mechanics.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-015-0009-1
  41. 41.
    Badulescu C, Bornert M, Dupré J-c, Equis S, Grédiac M, Molimard J, Picart P, Rotinat R, Valle V (2013) Demodulation of spatial carrier images: Performance analysis of several algorithms. Exper Mech 53(8):1357–1370Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang YQ, Sutton M, Bruck H, Schreier HW (2009) Quantitative error assessment in pattern matching: effects of intensity pattern noise, interpolation, strain and image contrast on motion measurements. Strain 45(2):160–178Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Su Y, Zhang Q, Gao Z, Xu X, Wu X (2015) Fourier-based interpolation bias prediction in digital image correlation. Opt Express 23(15):19242–19260Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Su Y, Zhang Q, Xu X, Gao Z (2016) Quality assessment of speckle patterns for DIC by consideration of both systematic errors and random errors. Opt Lasers Eng 86:132–142Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bomarito GF, Hochhalter JD, Ruggles TJ (2017) Development of optimal multiscale patterns for digital image correlation via local grayscale variation. Experimental Mechanics, accepted, onlineGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Surrel Y (1994) Moiré and grid methods: a signal-processing approach. In: Stupnicki J Pryputniewicz RJ, editor, Interferometry’94: photomechanics. SPIE, vol 2342Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Surrel Y (2000) Photomechanics, Topics in Applied Physic, volume 77, chapter Fringe Analysis. Springer, pp 55–102Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Clermont Auvergne, SIGMAInstitut PascalClermont-FerrandFrance
  2. 2.Laboratoire Lorrain de Recherche en Informatique et ses Applications, UMR CNRS 7503Université de Lorraine, CNRS, INRIA projet MagritVandoeuvre-lès-Nancy CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations