YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Two Calculation Verification Metrics Used in the Medical Device Industry: Revisiting the Limitations of Fractional Change

    Source: Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification:;2022:;volume( 007 ):;issue: 003::page 31004
    Author:
    Guler, Ismail;Aycock, Kenneth I.;Rebelo, Nuno
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4055506
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: Quantifying the fractional change in a predicted quantity of interest with successive mesh refinement is an attractive and widely used but limited approach to assessing numerical error and uncertainty in physicsbased computational modeling. Herein, we introduce the concept of a scalar multiplier αGCI to clarify the connection between fractional change and a more rigorous and accepted estimate of numerical uncertainty, the grid convergence index (GCI). Specifically, we generate lookup tables for αGCI as a function of observed order of accuracy and mesh refinement factor. We then illustrate the limitations of relying on fractional change alone as an acceptance criterion for mesh refinement using a case study involving the radial compression of a Nitinol stent. Results illustrate that numerical uncertainty is often many times larger than the observed fractional change in a mesh pair, especially in the presence of small mesh refinement factors or low orders of accuracy. We strongly caution against relying on fractional change alone as an acceptance criterion for mesh refinement studies, particularly in any highrisk applications requiring absolute prediction of quantities of interest. When computational resources make the systematic refinement required for calculating GCI impractical, submodeling approaches as demonstrated herein can be used to rigorously quantify discretization error at a comparatively minimal computational cost. To facilitate future quantitative mesh refinement studies, αGCI lookup tables herein provide a useful tool for guiding the selection of mesh refinement factor and element order.
    • Download: (2.746Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Two Calculation Verification Metrics Used in the Medical Device Industry: Revisiting the Limitations of Fractional Change

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4288978
    Collections
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification

    Show full item record

    contributor authorGuler, Ismail;Aycock, Kenneth I.;Rebelo, Nuno
    date accessioned2023-04-06T13:02:47Z
    date available2023-04-06T13:02:47Z
    date copyright9/19/2022 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2022
    identifier issn23772158
    identifier othervvuq_007_03_031004.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4288978
    description abstractQuantifying the fractional change in a predicted quantity of interest with successive mesh refinement is an attractive and widely used but limited approach to assessing numerical error and uncertainty in physicsbased computational modeling. Herein, we introduce the concept of a scalar multiplier αGCI to clarify the connection between fractional change and a more rigorous and accepted estimate of numerical uncertainty, the grid convergence index (GCI). Specifically, we generate lookup tables for αGCI as a function of observed order of accuracy and mesh refinement factor. We then illustrate the limitations of relying on fractional change alone as an acceptance criterion for mesh refinement using a case study involving the radial compression of a Nitinol stent. Results illustrate that numerical uncertainty is often many times larger than the observed fractional change in a mesh pair, especially in the presence of small mesh refinement factors or low orders of accuracy. We strongly caution against relying on fractional change alone as an acceptance criterion for mesh refinement studies, particularly in any highrisk applications requiring absolute prediction of quantities of interest. When computational resources make the systematic refinement required for calculating GCI impractical, submodeling approaches as demonstrated herein can be used to rigorously quantify discretization error at a comparatively minimal computational cost. To facilitate future quantitative mesh refinement studies, αGCI lookup tables herein provide a useful tool for guiding the selection of mesh refinement factor and element order.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleTwo Calculation Verification Metrics Used in the Medical Device Industry: Revisiting the Limitations of Fractional Change
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume7
    journal issue3
    journal titleJournal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4055506
    journal fristpage31004
    journal lastpage3100413
    page13
    treeJournal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification:;2022:;volume( 007 ):;issue: 003
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian