Infrared and Laser Engineering, Volume. 51, Issue 12, 20220202(2022)
Remote sensing satellite structure in-orbit thermal strain Bragg fiber grating monitoring method
Figures & Tables(24)
Fig. 1. FBG sensor network layout of remote sensing satellite active phased array antenna
Fig. 2. Finite element calculation process of thermal strain field of satellite antenna structure
Fig. 3. Characteristics of strain field distribution under uniform temperature load at 120 ℃
Fig. 4. Strain field variation curves under uniform temperature load
Fig. 5. FBG sensor temperature and strain monitoring system for high and low temperature environments. (a) Monitoring test system composition; (b) Physical photo of the monitoring test system: 1.PC 2.Strain gauges 3.FBG demodulator 4. Temperature test chamber
Fig. 6. Aluminum structural specimens. (a) Layout of structural specimen sensor; (b) Diagram of structure physical: 1.Resistance strain gauge 2.FBG strain sensor 3.FBG temperature sensor
Fig. 7. FBG temperature sensor center wavelength versus temperature. (a) Warming process; (b) Cooling process
Fig. 8. Thermal strain measurement of FBG strain transducer as a function of structure temperature. (a) FBG1; (b) FBG2; (c) FBG3
Fig. 9. Distribution characteristics of the temperature and strain fields of the satellite antenna under the temperature load of 100 ℃. (a) Distribution characteristics of the temperature field; (b) Distribution characteristics of the strain field
Fig. 10. Distribution characteristics of temperature and strain fields of satellite antenna under long time high temperature environment. (a) Distribution characteristics of temperature field; (b) Distribution characteristics of strain field
Fig. 12. Temperature variation curve under different temperature loads
Fig. 14. Schematic diagram of measurement points and error evaluation points
Fig. 15. Satellite antenna thermal strain field fiber optic monitoring test system. (a) Thermal strain field monitoring test system composition; (b) Photos of the thermal strain field monitoring test system: 1. structural specimen 2.Strain gauges 3. Thermal loading device 4. Multi-channel pyrometer 5. FBG Demodulator 6.PC
Fig. 16. Satellite antenna under 100 °C temperature load. (a) Reconstructed temperature field; (b) Reconstructed strain field
Fig. 17. Comparison of measured and reconstructed values under 100 ℃ temperature load. (a) Comparison of temperature fields; (b) Comparison of strain fields
Table 1. Material parameters of finite element model of satellite antenna structure
View tableView in ArticleTable 1. Material parameters of finite element model of satellite antenna structure
Material parameter type Material parameter value Density/g·cm−3 2.81 Elastic modulus/GPa 71.7 Poisson's ratio 0.25 Thermal conductivity/W·m−1·K−1 173 Specific heat capacity/J·kg−1·K−1 960 Thermal expansion coefficient/℃−1 23.6×10−6
Table 2. FBG temperature sensor sensitivity and linearity
View tableView in ArticleTable 2. FBG temperature sensor sensitivity and linearity
Temperature Sensor Loading method Temperature sensitivity/pm·℃−1 Linearity FBG4 Heating 10.21 0.993 Cooling 10.18 0.992 FBG5 Heating 10.23 0.996 Cooling 10.25 0.991 FBG6 Heating 10.19 0.995 Cooling 10.21 0.996
Table 3. FBG strain sensor maximum absolute error and average relative error
View tableView in ArticleTable 3. FBG strain sensor maximum absolute error and average relative error
Strain sensors Loading method Maximum absolute error/με Average relative error FBG1 Heating 68.6 2.38% Cooling 52.9 2.26% FBG2 Heating 49.5 2.65% Cooling 55.1 3.15% FBG3 Heating 64.7 1.95% Cooling 73.3 2.28%
Table 4. Reconstruction error of temperature field and strain field at different temperatures
View tableView in ArticleTable 4. Reconstruction error of temperature field and strain field at different temperatures
Temperature/℃ RMSE Temperature field Strain field 30 0.67% 1.06% 40 0.81% 1.35% 50 0.99% 1.45% 60 1.15% 1.56% 70 1.31% 1.69% 80 1.49% 1.86% 90 1.55% 1.92% 100 1.76% 2.23% Average value 1.22% 1.64%
Table 5. Reconstruction errors between reconstructed strain field and theoretically calculated strain field at different temperatures
View tableView in ArticleTable 5. Reconstruction errors between reconstructed strain field and theoretically calculated strain field at different temperatures
Temperature/℃ First cycle Second cycle Third cycle Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling 30 1.05% 1.09% 2.16% 2.21% 1.08% 1.16% 2.12% 2.18% 1.06% 1.12% 2.18% 2.15% 40 1.34% 1.39% 2.55% 2.57% 1.37% 1.31% 2.51% 2.61% 1.26% 1.34% 2.65% 2.58% 50 1.75% 1.72% 3.02% 3.06% 1.79% 1.85% 3.06% 3.12% 1.82% 1.86% 3.13% 3.15% 60 2.15% 2.19% 3.49% 3.52% 2.21% 2.26% 3.45% 3.55% 2.19% 2.12% 3.53% 3.59% 70 2.47% 2.45% 3.95% 3.82% 2.52% 2.47% 3.85% 3.82% 2.54% 2.46% 3.92% 3.84% 80 2.75% 2.65% 4.39% 4.35% 2.82% 2.75% 4.36% 4.45% 2.85% 2.79% 4.47% 4.39% 90 3.21% 3.37% 4.85% 4.82% 3.35% 3.19% 4.91% 4.92% 3.26% 3.23% 4.86% 4.89% 100 3.49% 3.49% 5.52% 5.52% 3.51% 3.50% 5.46% 5.48% 3.54% 3.54% 5.54% 5.54% Average 2.28% 2.29% 3.74% 3.73% 2.33% 2.31% 3.72% 3.77% 2.32% 2.31% 3.79% 3.77%
Table 6. Reconstruction error between reconstructed strain field and real strain field at different temperatures
View tableView in ArticleTable 6. Reconstruction error between reconstructed strain field and real strain field at different temperatures
Temperature/℃ First cycle Second cycle Third cycle Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Heating Cooling 30 1.58% 1.49% 3.76% 3.59% 1.49% 1.32% 3.59% 3.61% 1.32% 1.42% 3.61% 3.72% 40 1.76% 1.65% 4.79% 4.72% 1.57% 1.64% 4.97% 4.84% 1.78% 1.75% 4.82% 4.68% 50 2.53% 2.59% 5.58% 5.76% 2.69% 2.58% 5.65% 5.58% 2.42% 2.56% 5.52% 5.48% 60 2.97% 3.16% 6.75% 6.82% 2.78% 2.76% 6.93% 6.87% 2.87% 2.99% 6.83% 6.92% 70 3.46% 3.59% 7.35% 7.64% 3.24% 3.36% 7.75% 7.64% 3.37% 3.25% 7.59% 7.48% 80 3.98% 4.15% 7.82% 7.95% 3.87% 3.95% 7.92% 7.84% 3.88% 3.96% 7.89% 7.98% 90 4.62% 4.71% 8.05% 8.11% 4.78% 4.54% 8.16% 8.25% 4.54% 4.52% 8.13% 8.15% 100 5.48% 5.49% 8.42% 8.43% 5.12% 5.12% 8.38% 8.36% 5.43% 5.42% 8.32% 8.35% Average 3.30% 3.35% 6.57% 6.63% 3.19% 3.16% 6.67% 6.62% 3.20% 3.23% 6.59% 6.60%
Table 7. Reconstruction errors of structural temperature and strain fields under thermodynamic coupling
View tableView in ArticleTable 7. Reconstruction errors of structural temperature and strain fields under thermodynamic coupling
Weight quality/g 40 ℃ temperature load 70 ℃ temperature load 100 ℃ temperature load Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Temperature field Strain field Weight gain Weight loss Weight gain Weight loss Weight gain Weight loss Weight gain Weight loss Weight gain Weight loss Weight gain Weight loss 0 1.82% 1.76% 4.65% 4.68% 3.48% 3.62% 7.28% 7.16% 5.35% 5.48% 8.34% 8.35% 200 1.75% 1.88% 4.98% 4.91% 3.56% 3.51% 7.65% 7.66% 5.45% 5.54% 8.87% 8.68% 400 1.79% 1.94% 5.34% 5.24% 3.51% 3.48% 8.05% 8.12% 5.47% 5.48% 9.35% 9.18% 600 1.86% 1.84% 5.79% 5.85% 3.42% 3.55% 8.72% 8.85% 5.52% 5.64% 9.94% 9.82% 800 1.95% 1.82% 6.12% 6.24% 3.35% 3.52% 9.25% 9.22% 5.46% 5.62% 10.26% 10.14% 1000 1.84% 1.89% 6.53% 6.59% 3.48% 3.42% 9.56% 9.61% 5.54% 5.58% 10.85% 10.76% Average 1.84% 1.86% 5.57% 5.59% 3.47% 3.52% 8.42% 8.44% 5.47% 5.56% 9.60% 9.49%
Tools
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Haoran Wang, Mingli Dong, Guangkai Sun, Yanlin He, Kangpeng Zhou. Remote sensing satellite structure in-orbit thermal strain Bragg fiber grating monitoring method[J]. Infrared and Laser Engineering, 2022, 51(12): 20220202
Paper Information
Category: Optical communication and sensing
Received: Mar. 21, 2022
Accepted: --
Published Online: Jan. 10, 2023
The Author Email:
© Copyright 2018-2021 | Chinese Laser Press.
All Rights Reserved 沪ICP备15018463号-20