ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Fixed-Position Quasi-Static Load Calibration and Identification of an Aluminum Wing-Box Test Section Using Surface-Bonded Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Section-load calibration is used in aircraft wing-box testing. This study evaluates a fixed-position quasi-static load-calibration and identification procedure for one 7050 aluminum wing-box test section instrumented with surface-bonded fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors. A multi-point FBG network was arranged on the skins and webs using finite-element-guided sensor placement to construct bending-, shear-, and torsion-related response features; strain-free reference FBGs provided temperature compensation. All experiments used the same specimen geometry, fixed-root boundary condition, sensor layout, and four actuator positions. Conditions 1-6 were used for regression calibration, whereas Conditions 7 and 8 were held out for interpolation-type validation within the same loading configuration. The maximum/average relative errors were 6.53%/1.51% for bending moment, 2.62%/0.86% for shear force, and 4.04%/1.23% for torsional moment. These results apply only to local laboratory calibration of the tested configuration and do not establish transfer to other geometries, boundary conditions, sensor layouts, loading positions, environmental conditions, or dynamic loading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.