Application of 3D X-Ray CT Data Sets to Finite Element Analysis

  • P.-L. Bossart
  • H. E. Martz
  • H. R. Brand
  • K. Hollerbach

Abstract

Finite Element Modeling is widely used by the research community and industry in order to grasp a better understanding of real-world applications through computer simulations. This engineering tool is becoming more important as industry drives towards concurrent engineering. A Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is typically made up of three steps, namely the creation of a mesh, the computer simulation, and the post-processing of the results. A fundamental hindrance to fully exploiting the power of FEM is the human effort required to acquire complex part geometries. This preprocessing can represent up to 80% of an engineer’s time. Therefore, the need to minimize the amount of interactivity cannot be over stressed. Besides the need for a speed-up, the meshing should be based upon actual “as-built” geometries, which should be preferred to as-designed geometries from CAD models or generic descriptions. A CAD model may not accurately account for all the changes to the initial design that take place during the manufacturing process. A CAD model may simply not be available if the manufacturer has gone bankrupt or is part of the competition. In biomechanics applications, the generic descriptions of human parts are not precise enough, which limits the use of Finite Element Models.

Keywords

Attenuation Convolution Deconvolution Aliasing Onyx 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G.A. Mohr and F. Little, “Effective 3D Geometry Extraction and Reverse CAD Modeling”, Review of Progress in QNDE, vol. 14, pp. 651–656, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.H. Stanley, R.N. Yancey, Q. Cao and N.J. Dusaussoy, “Reverse Engineering and Rapid Prototyping for Solid Freeform Fabrication”, SPIE vol. 2455, pp. 306–311, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Canny, “A Computational Approach to Edge Detection”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 8, n. 6, pp. 679–697, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Vincent, “Morphological Grayscale Reconstruction in Image Analysis: Applications and Efficient Algorithms”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 2, n. 2, pp. 176–201, April 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. Vincent and P. Soille, “Watersheds in Digital Spaces: An Efficient Algorithm Based on Immersion Simulations”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 13, n. 6, pp. 583–598, June 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W.E. Lorensen and H.E. Cline, “Marching Cubes: a High Resolution Surface Extraction Algorithm”, Computer Graphics, vol. 21, n. 3, pp. 163–169, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.J. Schroeder, J.A. Zarge and W.E. Lorensen, “Decimation of Large Triangle Meshes”, Computer Graphics (SIGGRAPH 92), vol. 26, n. 2, pp. 65–70, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. Geiger, “Three-Dimensional Modeling of Human Organs and its Application to Diagnosis and Surgical Planning”, Ph.D. Thesis, Ecole des Mines de Paris, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P.M. Finnigan, A.F. Hathaway, W.E. Lorensen, I.J. Connell, V.N. Parthasarathy and J. B. Ross, “CATFEM — Computer Assisted Tomography and Finite Element Modeling”, Control and Dynamic Systems, vol. 49, pp. 298–337, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • P.-L. Bossart
    • 1
  • H. E. Martz
    • 1
  • H. R. Brand
    • 1
  • K. Hollerbach
    • 1
  1. 1.Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, L-333LivermoreUSA

Personalised recommendations