Cargando…

Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites

Pulsed Thermography (PT) data are usually affected by noise and as such most of the research effort in the last few years has been directed towards the development of advanced signal processing methods to improve defect detection. Among the numerous techniques that have been proposed, principal comp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebrahimi, Samira, Fleuret, Julien, Klein, Matthieu, Théroux, Louis-Daniel, Georges, Marc, Ibarra-Castanedo, Clemente, Maldague, Xavier
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8070624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33920261
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082682
_version_ 1783683513645531136
author Ebrahimi, Samira
Fleuret, Julien
Klein, Matthieu
Théroux, Louis-Daniel
Georges, Marc
Ibarra-Castanedo, Clemente
Maldague, Xavier
author_facet Ebrahimi, Samira
Fleuret, Julien
Klein, Matthieu
Théroux, Louis-Daniel
Georges, Marc
Ibarra-Castanedo, Clemente
Maldague, Xavier
author_sort Ebrahimi, Samira
collection PubMed
description Pulsed Thermography (PT) data are usually affected by noise and as such most of the research effort in the last few years has been directed towards the development of advanced signal processing methods to improve defect detection. Among the numerous techniques that have been proposed, principal component thermography (PCT)—based on principal component analysis (PCA)—is one of the most effective in terms of defect contrast enhancement and data compression. However, it is well-known that PCA can be significantly affected in the presence of corrupted data (e.g., noise and outliers). Robust PCA (RPCA) has been recently proposed as an alternative statistical method that handles noisy data more properly by decomposing the input data into a low-rank matrix and a sparse matrix. We propose to process PT data by RPCA instead of PCA in order to improve defect detectability. The performance of the resulting approach, Robust Principal Component Thermography (RPCT)—based on RPCA, was evaluated with respect to PCT—based on PCA, using a CFRP sample containing artificially produced defects. We compared results quantitatively based on two metrics, Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (CNR), for defect detection capabilities, and the Jaccard similarity coefficient, for defect segmentation potential. CNR results were on average 40% higher for RPCT than for PCT, and the Jaccard index was slightly higher for RPCT (0.7395) than for PCT (0.7010). In terms of computational time, however, PCT was 11.5 times faster than RPCT. Further investigations are needed to assess RPCT performance on a wider range of materials and to optimize computational time.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8070624
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80706242021-04-26 Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites Ebrahimi, Samira Fleuret, Julien Klein, Matthieu Théroux, Louis-Daniel Georges, Marc Ibarra-Castanedo, Clemente Maldague, Xavier Sensors (Basel) Article Pulsed Thermography (PT) data are usually affected by noise and as such most of the research effort in the last few years has been directed towards the development of advanced signal processing methods to improve defect detection. Among the numerous techniques that have been proposed, principal component thermography (PCT)—based on principal component analysis (PCA)—is one of the most effective in terms of defect contrast enhancement and data compression. However, it is well-known that PCA can be significantly affected in the presence of corrupted data (e.g., noise and outliers). Robust PCA (RPCA) has been recently proposed as an alternative statistical method that handles noisy data more properly by decomposing the input data into a low-rank matrix and a sparse matrix. We propose to process PT data by RPCA instead of PCA in order to improve defect detectability. The performance of the resulting approach, Robust Principal Component Thermography (RPCT)—based on RPCA, was evaluated with respect to PCT—based on PCA, using a CFRP sample containing artificially produced defects. We compared results quantitatively based on two metrics, Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (CNR), for defect detection capabilities, and the Jaccard similarity coefficient, for defect segmentation potential. CNR results were on average 40% higher for RPCT than for PCT, and the Jaccard index was slightly higher for RPCT (0.7395) than for PCT (0.7010). In terms of computational time, however, PCT was 11.5 times faster than RPCT. Further investigations are needed to assess RPCT performance on a wider range of materials and to optimize computational time. MDPI 2021-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8070624/ /pubmed/33920261 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082682 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ebrahimi, Samira
Fleuret, Julien
Klein, Matthieu
Théroux, Louis-Daniel
Georges, Marc
Ibarra-Castanedo, Clemente
Maldague, Xavier
Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title_full Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title_fullStr Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title_full_unstemmed Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title_short Robust Principal Component Thermography for Defect Detection in Composites
title_sort robust principal component thermography for defect detection in composites
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8070624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33920261
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082682
work_keys_str_mv AT ebrahimisamira robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT fleuretjulien robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT kleinmatthieu robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT therouxlouisdaniel robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT georgesmarc robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT ibarracastanedoclemente robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites
AT maldaguexavier robustprincipalcomponentthermographyfordefectdetectionincomposites