Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparison of 3 Digital Image Correlation Techniques on Necessarily Suboptimal Random Patterns Recorded By X-Ray

  • Published:
Experimental Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dynamic x-rays have been used to follow the deformation ahead of a steel ball fired into a mock-up of a generic cylindrical rocket motor. The impact was arranged to intersect a sparse lead powder layer within the mock explosive that created a random speckle pattern on x-ray film. Three different digital image correlation programs are compared to examine any sensitivity to the sub-optimal speckle pattern produced by the lead powder. An identical output data reduction method was used in all cases to aid comparison. All three correlation methods were able analyze the deformation, but all had intricacies that would require more detailed optimization of the data reduction in order to fully exploit the technique. Quantitative analysis showed that the three methods agreed closely in estimations of rigid body displacements between a pair of representative x-ray images. It was discovered that the deformation caused by the ball impact was highly localized and the useful data available about the deformation pattern was sparse. This limits the applicability of this technique to this specific application. Extensive cracking was not observed that would have aided the development of computer-based models for prediction of such impact events. The x-ray technique was however excellent for determining the ball position as a function of time after impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. www.correlatedsolutions.com

References

  1. Hild F, Roux S (2006) Digital image correlation: from displacement measurement to identification of elastic properties—a review. Strain 42(2):69–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sjodahl M (1994) Electronic speckle photography—increased accuracy by nonintegral pixel shifting. J Appl Opt 33:6667–6673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schreier HW, Braasch J, Sutton MA (2000) On the systematic errors in digital image correlation. Opt Eng 39(11):2915–2921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asay B (2010) Shock wave science and technology reference library, vol 5: non-shock initiation of explosives, 1 edn. Springer

  5. Bruck HA, McNeill SR, Sutton MA, Peters WH (1989) Digital image correlation using Newton–Raphson method of partial differential correction. Exp Mech 29:261–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Peters WH, Ranson WF (1982) Digital imaging techniques in experimental stress analysis. Opt Eng 21:427

    Google Scholar 

  7. Peters WH, Ranson WF (1983) Application of digital correlation methods to rigid body mechanics. Opt Eng 22:738–742

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sutton MA, Wolters WJ, Peters WH, Ranson WF, McNeill SR (1983) Determination of displacements using an improved digital correlation method. Image Vis Comput 1:133–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cheng DJ, Chiang FP, Tan YS, Don HS (1993) Digital speckle-displacement measurement using a complex spectrum method. Appl Opt 32(11):1839–1849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Eckstein A, Vlachos PP (2009) Digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) robust phase correlation. Meas Sci Technol 20:055,401

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sjodahl M (1997) Accuracy in electronic speckle photography. J Appl Opt 36:2875–2885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sjodahl M, Benckert L (1993) Electronic speckle photography—analysis of an algorithm giving the displacement with subpixel accuracy. J Appl Opt 32:2278–2284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang YQ, Sutton MA, Schreier HW (2009) Quantatative error assessment in pattern matching: effects of intensity pattern noise, interploation, subset size and image contrast on motion measurments. J Strain 45:160–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. White DJ, Take WA, Bolton MD (2003) Soil deformation measurement using particle image velocimetry (PIV) and photogrammetry. Geotechnique 53(7):619–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Los Alamos National Laboratory is operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, for the NNSA of the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC52-06NA25396. This research was partially sponsored by the Joint DoD/DoE Munitions Technology Development Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 87545, USA

    P. J. Rae

  2. Department of Physics, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, UK

    D. M. Williamson & J. Addiss

Authors
  1. P. J. Rae
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. M. Williamson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Addiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. J. Rae.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rae, P.J., Williamson, D.M. & Addiss, J. A Comparison of 3 Digital Image Correlation Techniques on Necessarily Suboptimal Random Patterns Recorded By X-Ray. Exp Mech 51, 467–477 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-010-9444-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-010-9444-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation