Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Ramalho, Gmf

  • Google
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2022Damage Classification Methodology Utilizing Lamb Waves and Artificial Neural Networks2citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Da Silva, Lfm
1 / 36 shared
Lopes, Am
1 / 9 shared
Barbosa, Mrsp
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2022

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Da Silva, Lfm
  • Lopes, Am
  • Barbosa, Mrsp
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Damage Classification Methodology Utilizing Lamb Waves and Artificial Neural Networks

  • Da Silva, Lfm
  • Lopes, Am
  • Ramalho, Gmf
  • Barbosa, Mrsp
Abstract

As the aerospace industry develops, there is a need for applying new materials and construc-tion techniques, able to create lighter and more efficient aircrafts. Most advances also imply severe regulations that require novel methods suited to monitor critical components. One method that goes beyond simple nondestructive testing is structural health monitoring (SHM), more specifically Lamb waves (LW)-based SHM. Indeed, LW have shown great promise in nondestructive in situ testing, but require computationally expensive calculations, so that precise results can be obtained. An opportunity to overcome LW drawbacks arises with the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms. In this article, the performance of conventional feedfor-ward and convolutional artificial neural networks for damage classification in aluminum sheets is compared, and a novel methodology to classify damage is proposed. The ML techniques adopted require large sets of prior data, which are generated by numerical simulations utilizing the finite element method. The damage classification pipeline comprises (i) generating LW by one actuator, measuring the structure response using a set of sensors, (iii) extracting features from the raw signals and training the ML algorithms, and (iv) assessing the classification accuracy. The methodology has the advantage of being baseline free, easily extendable for automatic feature extraction and testing, and adaptable to different types of damage and structures, as long as the algorithms are trained with suitable data.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • simulation
  • extraction
  • aluminium
  • machine learning