RESEARCH PAPER
Virtual Strain Sensing in a Type IV COPV Burst Test
 
More details
Hide details
1
Mechanical Engineering, Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Turkey
 
 
Submission date: 2026-05-14
 
 
Final revision date: 2026-07-10
 
 
Acceptance date: 2026-07-10
 
 
Publication date: 2026-08-14
 
 
Corresponding author
Ahmet ÇALIK   

Mechanical Engineering, Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi,, Mühendisli, 15200, MERKEZ, Turkey
 
 
Acta Mechanica et Automatica 2026;20(3):543-549
 
HIGHLIGHTS
  • Virtual strain sensing is benchmarked for a Type IV COPV burst test
  • Simple baselines reach high within-test reconstruction accuracy
  • Extrapolation to unseen pressure regimes remains limited
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
This study evaluates data-driven virtual strain sensing in the cylindrical region of a Type IV composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) using the open synchronized record of one vessel and one hydraulic burst test. The analysis is intentionally framed as a single-test comparative case study rather than a general reference standard. Twelve cylinder channels, representing six positions with axial and hoop gauges, were examined through position-holdout reconstruction within the same burst record, pressure-conditioned reconstruction without explicit time, and a within-record high-pressure stress test above 125 bar. Direction-wise same-time, pressure-bin, and isotonic baselines were compared with linear regression, ridge regression, random forest, and multilayer perceptron (MLP) models. The 115,308 long-format rows originate from one synchronized experiment and were therefore treated as correlated observations, not independent experimental replications. Within the cylinder subset, the same-time mean achieved R²=0.9915, while the MLP without coordinates achieved R²=0.9906±0.0002. When explicit time was removed, the pressure-bin baseline remained stronger than the time-free MLP. In the high-pressure stress test, all models deteriorated and the time-free MLP fell to R²=-1.8043. A supplementary dome analysis also showed substantially poorer reconstruction for hoop gauges. These findings indicate that replacement of a missing cylinder gauge is feasible within an already instrumented burst test, but they do not establish cross-vessel or cross-test generalization. Practical deployment will require repeated tests, multiple vessels, mechanics-aware models, and calibrated uncertainty estimates.
REFERENCES (27)
1.
Zhou W, Wang J, Pan Z, Liu J, Ma L, Zhou J, et al. Review on optimi-zation design, failure analysis and non-destructive testing of composite hydrogen storage vessel. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2022;47(91):38862–83.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhy....
 
2.
Eko AJ, Epaarachchi J, Jewewantha J, Zeng X. A review of type IV composite overwrapped pressure vessels. International Journal of Hy-drogen Energy. 2025;109:551–73.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhy....
 
3.
Bouhala L, Polesel J, Karatrantos A, Perbal S, Senf B, Hiekel A, et al. Review of state-of-the-art of structural health monitoring in hydrogen composite pressure vessels. Composites Part C: Open Access. 2025;18:100635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom....
 
4.
Meemary B, Vasiukov D, Deléglise-Lagardère M, Chaki S. Sensors integration for structural health monitoring in composite pressure ves-sels: A review. Composite Structures. 2025;351:118546.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
5.
Chi G, Xu S, Yu D, Wang Z, He Z, Wang K, et al. A brief review of structural health monitoring based on flexible sensing technology for hy-drogen storage tank. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2024;80:980–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhy....
 
6.
Lainé E, Dupré JC, Grandidier JC, Cruz M. Instrumented tests on composite pressure vessels (type IV) under internal water pressure. In-ternational Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46(1):1334–46. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.09.160.
 
7.
Oromiehie E, Nagulapally P, Donough MJ, Prusty BG. Automated manufacture and experimentation of composite overwrapped pressure vessel with embedded optical sensor. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2024;79:1215–26.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhy....
 
8.
Modesto AJ, Birgul R, Werlink RJ, Catbas FN. Damage detection of composite overwrapped pressure vessels using ARX models. Interna-tional Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping. 2021;192:104410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpv....
 
9.
Jiang K, Han Q, Du X, Ni P. Structural dynamic response reconstruc-tion and virtual sensing using a sequence-to-sequence modeling with at-tention mechanism. Automation in Construction. 2021;131:103895.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autc....
 
10.
Mora B, Basurko J, Sabahi I, Leturiondo U, Albizuri J. Strain virtual sensing for structural health monitoring under variable loads. Sensors. 2023;23(10):4706. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23104....
 
11.
Maes K, Lombaert G. Validation of virtual sensing for the reconstruction of stresses in a railway bridge using field data of the KW51 bridge. Me-chanical Systems and Signal Processing. 2023;190:110142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymss....
 
12.
Zhang Z, Peng C, Wang G, Ju Z, Ma L. A new optimal sensor place-ment method for virtual sensing of composite laminate. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing. 2023;195:110319. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110319.
 
13.
Lee S, Park M, Oh MH, Lee PS. Virtual sensing for real-time strain field estimation and its verification on a laboratory-scale jacket structure under water waves. Computers and Structures. 2024;298:107344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
14.
Lee S, Lee PS. Strain sensor placement method considering operation-al loads for virtual sensing of structural deformation. Computers and Structures. 2025;315:107763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
15.
Chen Z, Bao Y, Li H, Spencer BF. A novel distribution regression approach for data loss compensation in structural health monitoring. Structural Health Monitoring. 2018;17(6):1473–90. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1475921717745719.
 
16.
Oh BK, Glisic B, Kim Y, Park HS. Convolutional neural network–based data recovery method for structural health monitoring. Structural Health Monitoring. 2020;19(6):1821–38. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1475921719897571.
 
17.
Lei X, Sun L, Xia Y. Lost data reconstruction for structural health monitoring using deep convolutional generative adversarial networks. Structural Health Monitoring. 2021;20(4):2069–87. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1475921720959226.
 
18.
Cha YJ, Ali R, Lewis J, Büyüköztürk O. Deep learning-based structural health monitoring. Automation in Construction. 2024;161:105328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autc....
 
19.
Wu Y, Sicard B, Gadsden SA. Physics-informed machine learning: A comprehensive review on applications in anomaly detection and condi-tion monitoring. Expert Systems with Applications.2024;255:124678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa....
 
20.
Spencer Jr. BF, Sim SH, Kim RE, Yoon H. Advances in artificial intelligence for structural health monitoring: A comprehensive review. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2025;29(3):100203. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.kscej.2025.100203.
 
21.
Uluocak I, Uludamar E. Comparative evaluation of machine learning models for predicting noise and vibration of a biodiesel-CNG fuelled die-sel engine. Measurement. 2025;249:117021. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.measurement.2025.117021.
 
22.
Uludamar E, Uluocak Ì. Artificial intelligence-based prediction of engine noise and vibration in biodiesel-diesel engines with hydrogen injection. Fuel. 2025;385:134071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel....
 
23.
Wang Q, Qin H, Jia L, Li Z, Zhang G, Li Y, et al. Failure prediction and optimization for composite pressure vessel combining FEM simulation and machine learning approach. Composite Structures. 2024;337:118099. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compstruct.2024.118099.
 
24.
Hong H, Kim W, Kim S, Lee K, Kim SS. Deep transfer learning for efficient and accurate prediction of composite pressure vessel behav-iors. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing. 2024;186:108413.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
25.
Lüders C, Ropte S, Schmidt D, Liebisch M. Hydraulic burst pressure test of type IV composite pressure vessel. Zenodo; 2024. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo....
 
26.
Lüders C, Ropte S, Schmidt D, Liebisch M. Dataset on hydraulic burst pressure test of type IV composite pressure vessel. Data in Brief. 2025;59:111333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.....
 
27.
Bardiani J, Faure Ragani R, Pinello L, Kefal A, Manes A, Sbarufatti C. Shape sensing and damage detection of composite pressure vessels using inverse finite element method coupled with physics-based strain pre-extrapolation. Thin-Walled Structures. 2026;218:113935.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.....
 
eISSN:2300-5319
ISSN:1898-4088
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top