In this article, the design and development of a 3D grain configuration representation method with small data and high accuracy are presented, by which a unified grain database is established. There are two vital components in our proposed method: the traditional signed distance field (SDF) method is used for the unified representation of the 3D grain configuration; the proper generalized decomposition is employed to decompose the original SDF function to compress the data. With the proposed method, the reconstruction of 3D grain configuration is realized with small data and high accuracy, based on which the similarity measurement of different grains is proposed and the reuse of the 3D grain configurations is realized. The efficacy and accuracy of the proposed method are validated by reconstructing 3D grain configurations and the burnback curves of two different grain models. The similarities of the eight grains are calculated, which are accurately consistent with the burning surface area calculations results. The experiment results demonstrate that the proposed methods are feasible and efficient, and are significant for design case data and knowledge reuse.
KamranA. Design and optimization of 3D radial slot grain configuration. Chin J Aeronaut2010; 23(04): 409–414.
2.
BehbahaniMSaghaeeANoorossanaR. A case-based reasoning system development for statistical process control: case representation and retrieval. Pergamon Press, Inc., 2012.
3.
Jian-GuangGUZhangWHWangZW. Solid rocket motor structure selection based on knowledge reuse. J Propulsion Technol2008; 29(1): 1.
4.
LuHLiYChenM, et al.Brain intelligence: go beyond artificial intelligence. Mobile Netw Appl2018; 23(2): 368–375. DOI: 10.1007/s11036-017-0932-8.
5.
KwakEDetchevIHabibA, et al.Precise photogrammetric reconstruction using model-based image fitting for 3D beam deformation monitoring. J Surv Eng2013; 139(3): 143–155. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)SU.1943-5428.0000105.
6.
XuXHeLLuH, et al.Deep adversarial metric learning for cross-modal retrieval. World Wide Web2019; 22: 657–672.
7.
QiuchenLSanghoonL. Image-Based technologies for constructing as-is building information models for existing buildings. J Comput Civil Eng2017; 31(4): 1–14.
8.
TangPHuberDAkinciB, et al.Automatic reconstruction of as-built building information models from laser-scanned point clouds: a review of related techniques. Automat Construct2010; 19(7): 829–843.
9.
XiongFXieH. A 3D surface matching method using keypoint-based covariance matrix descriptors. IEEE Access2017; 99: 1.
10.
MaZLiuS. A review of 3D reconstruction techniques in civil engineering and their applications. Adv Eng Inform2018; 37: 163–174. DOI: 10.1016/j.aei.2018.05.005.
MuzahidAAMWanWSohelF, et al.3D object classification using a volumetric deep neural network: an efficient octree guided auxiliary learning approach. IEEE Access2020; 8: 23802–23816. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2968506.
14.
ChenJLiC-J. A 3D triangular prism spline element using B-net method. Eur J Mech - A/Solids2019; 75: 485–496. DOI: 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2019.02.014.
15.
PandeyADattaRBhattacharyaB. Topology optimization of compliant structures and mechanisms using constructive solid geometry for 2-d and 3-d applications. Soft Comput2017; 21(5); 1157–1179. DOI: 10.1007/s00500-015-1845-8.
16.
JonesMWBaerentzenJASramekM. 3D distance fields: a survey of techniques and applications. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph2006; 12(4): 581–599.
17.
LorensenWEClineHE. Marching cubes: a high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm. In: Presented at the Proceedings of the 14th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 1987. [Online]. Available: https://doi-org-s.nudtproxy.yitlink.com/10.1145/37401.37422
18.
AkikiGJacksonT.LBalachandarS, et al. Pairwise interaction extended point-particle model for a random array of monodisperse spheres. J Fluid Mech2017; 813(0): 882–928.
19.
FriskenSFPerryRNRockwoodAP, et al.Adaptively sampled distance fields: a general representation of shape for computer graphics. In: Presented at the Proceedings of the 27th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi-org-s.nudtproxy.yitlink.com/10.1145/344779.344899
20.
TeschnerMKimmerleSHeidelbergerB, et al.Collision detection for deformable objects. Comput Graphics Forum2005; 24(1): 61–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8659.2005.00829.x.
ZepingWDonghuiWWenjieW, et al.Solid rocket motor design employing an efficient performance matching approach. Proc Inst Mech Eng G: J Aerosp Eng2019; 233(11): 4052–4065.
27.
WillcoxMABrewsterMQTangKC, et al.Solid propellant grain design and burnback simulation using a minimum distance function. J Propul Power2015; 23(2): 465–475.
28.
ChinestaFKeuningsRLeygueA. The proper generalized decomposition for advanced numerical simulations: a primer, 2014. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-02865-1.
29.
ChinestaFAmmarACuetoE. Recent advances and new challenges in the use of the proper generalized decomposition for solving multidimensional models. Arch Computat Methods Eng2010; 17(4): 327–350. DOI: 10.1007/s11831-010-9049-y.
30.
ZhangCWuCNandakumarK. Effective geometric algorithms for immersed boundary method using signed distance field. J Fluids Eng2018; 141(6).
31.
PrinceZMRagusaJC. Space-energy separated representations for multigroup neutron diffusion using proper generalized decompositions. (in English)Annals Nucl Energy2020; 142: 107360. Art no. 107360. DOI: 10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107360.
32.
MarchandBChamoinLReyC. Real-time updating of structural mechanics models using Kalman filtering, modified constitutive relation error, and proper generalized decomposition. (in English). Int J Numer Meth Eng2016; 107(9): 786–810. DOI: 10.1002/nme.5197.
33.
ChinestaFLeygueABordeuF, et al.PGD-based computational vademecum for efficient design, optimization and control. Arch Computat Methods Eng2013; 20(1): 31–59. DOI: 10.1007/s11831-013-9080-x.
34.
ReisJAlmeidaJDíezP, et al.Error estimation and adaptivity for PGD based on complementary solutions, 2020.
35.
IbanezRAbisset-ChavanneEAmmarA, et al.A multidimensional data-driven sparse identification technique: the sparse proper generalized decomposition. (in English). Complexity2018; 2018: 1–11. Art no. 5608286. DOI: 10.1155/2018/5608286.
36.
HeybergerCBoucardP-ANéronD. Multiparametric analysis within the proper generalized decomposition framework. Comput Mech2012; 49(3): 277–289. DOI: 10.1007/s00466-011-0646-x.
37.
PrulièreEChinestaFAmmarA, et al.On the solution of the heat equation in very thin tapes. Int J Therm Sci2013; 65: 148–157. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2012.10.017.
38.
AmmarAMokdadBChinestaF, et al.A new family of solvers for some classes of multidimensional partial differential equations encountered in kinetic theory modelling of complex fluids. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech2007; 144(2): 98–121. DOI: 10.1016/j.jnnfm.2007.03.009.
39.
GonzálezDAmmarAChinestaF, et al.Recent advances on the use of separated representations. Int J Numer Meth Eng2010; 81: 637–659.
40.
ChinestaFLeygueABeringhierM, et al.Towards a framework for non‐linear thermal models in shell domains. Int J Numer Method Heat Fluid Flow2013; 23: 55–73.
41.
BognetBBordeuFChinestaF, et al.Advanced simulation of models defined in plate geometries: 3D solutions with 2D computational complexity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2012; 201–204: 1–12.
42.
GinerEBognetBRódenasJJ, et al.The Proper Generalized Decomposition (PGD) as a numerical procedure to solve 3D cracked plates in linear elastic fracture mechanics. Int J Sol Structures2013; 50.
43.
BrisCLLelievreTMadayY. Results and questions on a nonlinear approximation approach for solving high-dimensional partial differential equations. Constructive Approximation2009; 30(3): 621–651.
44.
CancesEEhrlacherVLelievreT. Greedy algorithms for high-dimensional non-symmetric linear problems, 2012.
45.
FalcoANouyA. Proper generalized decomposition for nonlinear convex problems in tensor banach spaces, 2011.
46.
LiSWuZWangD, et al.An isogeometric boundary element reanalysis framework based on proper generalized decomposition. In: 2017 8th International conference on mechanical and aerospace engineering (ICMAE), Prague, Czech Republic, 2017.
47.
HegabAMSaitHHHussainA, et al.Numerical modeling for the combustion of simulated solid rocket motor propellant. Comput Fluids2014; 89.
48.
WillcoxMABrewsterMQTangKC, et al.Solid propellant grain design and burnback simulation using a minimum distance function. J Propul Power2007; 23(2): 465–475. DOI: 10.2514/1.22937.
49.
KiWKoTKimS, et al.3D grain burnback analysis using the partial interface tracking method. Aerosp Sci Technol2017; 68: 58–67. DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2017.04.023.
50.
OhS-HLeeHJRohT-S. Development of a hybrid method in a 3-D numerical burn-back analysis for solid propellant grains. Aerosp Sci Technol2020; 106: 106103. DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106103.
