Comparison of subset-based local and FE-based global digital image correlation: Theoretical error analysis and validation

Abstract Subset-based local and finite-element-based (FE-based) global digital image correlation (DIC) approaches are the two primary image matching algorithms widely used for full-field displacement mapping. Very recently, the performances of these different DIC approaches have been experimentally investigated using numerical and real-world experimental tests. The results have shown that in typical cases, where the subset (element) size is no less than a few pixels and the local deformation within a subset (element) can be well approximated by the adopted shape functions, the subset-based local DIC outperforms FE-based global DIC approaches because the former provides slightly smaller root-mean-square errors and offers much higher computation efficiency. Here we investigate the theoretical origin and lay a solid theoretical basis for the previous comparison. We assume that systematic errors due to imperfect intensity interpolation and undermatched shape functions are negligibly small, and perform a theoretical analysis of the random errors or standard deviation (SD) errors in the displacements measured by two local DIC approaches (i.e., a subset-based local DIC and an element-based local DIC) and two FE-based global DIC approaches (i.e., Q4-DIC and Q8-DIC). The equations that govern the random errors in the displacements measured by these local and global DIC approaches are theoretically derived. The correctness of the theoretically predicted SD errors is validated through numerical translation tests under various noise levels. We demonstrate that the SD errors induced by the Q4-element-based local DIC, the global Q4-DIC and the global Q8-DIC are 4, 1.8–2.2 and 1.2–1.6 times greater, respectively, than that associated with the subset-based local DIC, which is consistent with our conclusions from previous work.

[1]  Gilles Lubineau,et al.  A Dissipation Gap Method for full‐field measurement‐based identification of elasto‐plastic material parameters , 2012 .

[2]  Hugh Alan Bruck,et al.  Quantitative Error Assessment in Pattern Matching: Effects of Intensity Pattern Noise, Interpolation, Strain and Image Contrast on Motion Measurements , 2009 .

[3]  Shaopeng Ma,et al.  Mesh-based digital image correlation method using higher order isoparametric elements , 2012 .

[4]  S. Roux,et al.  Comparison of Local and Global Approaches to Digital Image Correlation , 2012 .

[5]  Anand Asundi,et al.  Two-dimensional digital image correlation for in-plane displacement and strain measurement: a review , 2009 .

[6]  K. Qian,et al.  Study on subset size selection in digital image correlation for speckle patterns. , 2008, Optics express.

[7]  Yaofeng Sun,et al.  Finite element formulation for a digital image correlation method. , 2005, Applied optics.

[8]  Hubert W. Schreier,et al.  Image Correlation for Shape, Motion and Deformation Measurements: Basic Concepts,Theory and Applications , 2009 .

[9]  M. A. Sutton,et al.  Systematic errors in digital image correlation caused by intensity interpolation , 2000 .

[10]  Hugh Alan Bruck,et al.  Digital image correlation using Newton-Raphson method of partial differential correction , 1989 .

[11]  Bing Pan,et al.  Comparison of Subset-Based Local and Finite Element-Based Global Digital Image Correlation , 2015 .

[12]  B. Pan Recent Progress in Digital Image Correlation , 2011 .

[13]  M. Bonnet,et al.  Overview of Identification Methods of Mechanical Parameters Based on Full-field Measurements , 2008 .

[14]  Xie Huimin,et al.  Performance of sub-pixel registration algorithms in digital image correlation , 2006 .

[15]  Benoît Blaysat,et al.  The constitutive compatibility method for identification of material parameters based on full-field measurements , 2013 .

[16]  Stepan Vladimirovitch Lomov,et al.  A Self Adaptive Global Digital Image Correlation Algorithm , 2014, Experimental Mechanics.

[17]  Bing Pan,et al.  Bias error reduction of digital image correlation using Gaussian pre-filtering , 2013 .

[18]  Huimin Xie,et al.  Mean intensity gradient: An effective global parameter for quality assessment of the speckle patterns used in digital image correlation , 2010 .

[19]  B. Pan,et al.  The errors in digital image correlation due to overmatched shape functions , 2015 .

[20]  Long Tian,et al.  Superfast robust digital image correlation analysis with parallel computing , 2015 .

[21]  Bing Pan,et al.  Random Errors in Digital Image Correlation Due to Matched or Overmatched Shape Functions , 2015 .

[22]  M. Grédiac,et al.  Assessment of Digital Image Correlation Measurement Errors: Methodology and Results , 2009 .

[23]  Wei Tong,et al.  Fast, Robust and Accurate Digital Image Correlation Calculation Without Redundant Computations , 2013, Experimental Mechanics.

[24]  Bing Pan,et al.  Some practical considerations in finite element-based digital image correlation , 2015 .

[25]  Phillip L. Reu,et al.  Experimental and Numerical Methods for Exact Subpixel Shifting , 2011 .

[26]  S. Roux,et al.  “Finite-Element” Displacement Fields Analysis from Digital Images: Application to Portevin–Le Châtelier Bands , 2006 .

[27]  Kai Li,et al.  A fast digital image correlation method for deformation measurement , 2011 .