Experimental Techniques

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-018-0282-x

Performance Characterization of a Flexible Nozzle System (FNS)

of a Large Solid Rocket Booster Using 3-D DIC
D. Swain1 · S.K. Biswal2 · B.P. Thomas1 · S.S. Babu2 · J. Philip1

Received: 12 February 2018 / Accepted: 20 August 2018

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2018

Abstract
In this paper, simpler methods of measuring various performance parameters, such as pivot point excursions, actuation
angles, and symmetry of the nozzle motion of a flex nozzle system (FNS) meant for a large solid rocket booster nozzle
are reported. A novel attempt is made to estimate the above parameters using the pivot point co-ordinates as primary data.
Towards this objective, the trajectories of a reference point obtained using one stereo based 3-dimensional Digital Image
Correlation (3-D DIC) system, above a nozzle simulator during the vectoring tests, were utilized. A linear least squares
(LLS) method is proposed and validated for locating the pivot point from the 3-D DIC trajectory. The pivot point location
and the measured DIC displacements were further analyzed to evaluate the target parameters. The results show that use
of the 3-D DIC system provides confidence on the performance of the actuators with a simplified measurement scheme.
Moreover, it generates useful additional data, as spin-offs, comparable with the conventional measurements. Thereby data
reduction, testing time and resource required for characterization of a FNS is expected to reduce considerably.

Keywords 3-D DIC · Flex nozzle system (FNS) · Pivot point excursions · Actuation angle · Stroke symmetry · Linear least
squares (LLS) method

Introduction of elastomers (rubbers), cf. Figure 1. The motion of the

Solid rocket motors (SRM) have a distinct advantage as boos-
ter stages in launch vehicles due to its high thrust to weight
ratio, reliability, and high propellant density. Large solid boos-
ters invariably use secondary injection thrust vector control
(SITVC) or flex nozzle control (FNC) systems. In the current
scenario, most of the new solid rockets are configured with
FNC systems owing to its design simplicity and reliability.
A typical FNC system utilizes a flexible joint configuration
with a flex seal and a pair of actuators known as flex
nozzle system (FNS) and associated control electronics for
achieving the actuation requirements during flight [1].
FNS belongs to a class of compliant mechanisms employing
a flexible element called flex seal which is often a cylindrical
body with spherical metallic shims having alternate layers
 D. Swain
digendranath@gmail.com
1 Experimental Mechanics Division, Vikram Sarabhai Space
Center, ISRO, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, 695 022 India
2 S-200 Project, Vikram Sarabhai Space Center, ISRO,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, 695 022 India
nozzle is achieved through deformation of the elastomeric
material [2]. All the shims have a common geometric center
by design. The flex seal is expected to have a pivot point
located at this geometric center called as geometric pivot
point (GPP), see Fig. 1. In reality, there is an excursion in
the actual or effective pivot point from the GPP due to (i)
deformation of the flex seal under chamber pressure, (ii)
viscoelastic behavior of the elastomer, and (iii) asymmetry
due to actuator motion. The effective pivot point is shown in
Fig. 1 as distinguished from the reference and the vectored
configurations of the nozzle. The quantification of flex
seal pivot point excursion is crucial for configuring the
dynamic envelope of the movable nozzle. Moreover, since
the actuation systems are position or stroke controlled, the
flex seal pivot point dynamics has an important bearing on
the achieved swing angle of the nozzle.
Previously, relatively smaller size flex nozzle systems
(FNS) have been successfully flown by Indian Space
Research Organization (ISRO) [3] and other space agencies
[4]. Recently, a pair of large size solid rocket boosters
based on FNS has been designed for the lift up phase of a
recently developed launch vehicle of ISRO. These boosters,
known as S200 stages, are one amongst the largest solid

Fig. 1 Cross-sectional line diagram of the nozzle with the Flex Nozzle System (FNS) where the geometric and effective pivot points are shown
during the actuation of the nozzle from a reference state to a vectored state
rocket motors in the world; loaded with 205 Tons of solid
propellant. In S200, the FNS is configured with vectoring
capability of ±5.5◦ in the actuation planes and ±7.8◦ in
a resultant plane. Two electro-hydraulic actuators located
90◦ apart facilitate omni-axial vectoring capability of the
nozzle. The excursions in the effective pivot point of this
FNS needs to be determined to gain confidence in the design
and configuration. Moreover, it also has been reported
that, the pivot point location alters when there is any
change in the internal pressure of the chamber [23]. Apart
from the pivot point excursions, the performance of FNS
based thrust vector control (TVC) system are sensitive to
parameters such as nozzle swing angle, stroke symmetry of
the actuators, and thrust vector axis (thrust line alignment)
among other factors [5, 6]. All the parameters highlighted
above play a crucial role for the proper functioning of an
FNS system.
In this paper, simplistic methods of measuring pivot point
co-ordinates, its excursions, actuation angles and symmetry
of nozzle motion have been reported using only one stereo
camera based 3-D DIC setup. On this date, DIC has emerged
as a state of the art and well established non-contacting
optical technique for whole field displacement and strain
measurement [7, 8]. The 2-dimensional version of this
technique was initially proposed by Peters et al. [9, 10]
which could measure in-plane displacements and strains on
a flat objects using only a single camera (monocular vision).
Exp Tech
Vectored
Configuration
Reference
Configuration
Since real objects are not planar, 2-D DIC subsequently
matured to 3-D DIC by incorporating the principles of
stereo photogrammetry (binocular vision) wherein a pair
of cameras were employed [11–14]. 3-D DIC can measure
three dimensional displacements and surface strains on
any practical object of interest [7, 8, 15, 16]. In recent
years, research efforts are focused more towards obtaining
three dimensional displacements and strains by employing
only a single camera [17–22]. Such efforts are going to
revolutionize the field of DIC and would be expected to
reduce the cost of the system significantly for high speed
and dynamical applications.
In this paper, experiments are carried out with 3-D DIC
alone using a stereo pair of cameras, hence the discussions
would be limited to such arrangements. Moreover, since 3-
D DIC can capture the 3-dimensional motion of an object in
the range of micrometers to hundreds of millimeters with-
out compromising any accuracy; it facilitates the precise
measurement of more than one performance parameter of
the flex nozzle using only one 3-D DIC system. Herein,
a brief summary of the existing techniques for measuring
the sensitive nozzle performance parameters is presented.
A somewhat cumbersome procedure using many displace-
ment sensors has been used in Ref. [23] to determine the
excursions of the pivot point around 40 years ago, how-
ever the co-ordinates of the pivot point and other parameters
were not determined. In Ref. [24], displacement sensors
Exp Tech
and inclinometers have been used for estimating nozzle
rotational angles alone. Reference [25] reports the use of
infrared photoelectric method to determine nozzle axis and
vectored angle. Laser trackers have been used for measur-
ing nozzle vector angle [26] and thrust line measurement
[27]. The work by Guo et al. [28] combined four pho-
togrammetry cameras to measure the angle and motion of
the nozzle wherein involved algorithms have been proposed.
A promising method using a single camera for measuring
nozzle swing angle at higher speeds is proposed in Ref.
[29], where again complicated algorithms have been used.
A similar but slightly simpler method was adopted in Ref.
[31] to measure the swing center of a nozzle which was
limited to nozzles undergoing planar motion. To the best of
the authors knowledge only a countable number of papers
determine more than one nozzle performance parameter in a
single instrumentation setup. A noteworthy attempt however
was made in Ref. [30] for estimating nozzle motion param-
eters such as rotation center and swing angle for relatively
smaller nozzles. Moreover, the algorithm used in Ref. [30]
is complicated and the approach is different from the pro-
posed method in this paper. It is worth noting that until now
attempt is not made to use the astounding capability of 3-
D DIC to measure the performance parameters of large size
nozzles.
The literature review indicates the numerous attempts made
to measure the swing angle (actuation angle/nozzle rotation)
and thrust line alignment (nozzle axis/thrust vector axis) of
vectored nozzles. Many of these papers utilized non-contact
and/or optical techniques for measuring the performance
parameters of nozzles. However, not many efforts have been
made for the determination of the pivot point co-ordinates
until now except Refs. [30, 31]. One of the fundamental
requirements for estimation of the target parameters, as
proposed in this paper, is the determination of the pivot
point co-ordinates. The use of 3-D DIC in tandem with
a linear least squares (LLS) algorithm as outlined in this
paper would help in determining the much sought after pivot
point coordinates. The LLS algorithm utilizes the trajectory
of a reference point on a nozzle simulator obtained from
3-D DIC to predict the pivot point co-ordinates. The
trajectory is basically the dynamic displacement of the
reference point in each frame of the image. The algorithm
was validated with synthetic data and the experimental
uncertainties were estimated mixing random noise of
various amplitudes. With the gained confidence, the actual
pivot point coordinates were measured during the nozzle
vectoring cycles. Hence, finding the pivot point excursions
became straight forward whereas the other parameters were
estimated utilizing known formulas from solid geometry
and the data generated from 3-D DIC as described in the
“Measurement Procedure”. The data derived from 3-D DIC
displacements are compared with the available measuring
instruments in the test rig for validation and to find further
scopes for improvement. The details of the experiments,
measurement procedure and results are reported in the
forthcoming sections with a brief conclusion.
Experimental Details
The flex seal (see in Figs. 1 and 2) is the most important
element of a FNS, thereby the functional and structural
adequacy of each flex seal is proved through a series
of ground tests such as proof pressure test (PPT), null
positioning test (NPT) and vectoring test (VT). The NPT
and VT are carried out after the PPT. PPT is completed
without the nozzle being assembled. The PPT setup is
modified by assembling the two actuators and a nozzle
simulator called as the cross beam assembly1 as shown in
Fig. 2 for NPT and VT. The two actuators were connected
to the arms of the cross beam (Fig. 2). The line diagram in
Fig. 2 shows only one actuator whereas the other actuator
would be along the normal to the plane of the paper.
An isometric view of the cross-beam assembly is shown
photographically in Fig. 3a with the two actuators A1 and
A2 connected to the arms of the dummy nozzle.
During the vectoring tests, the FNS is tested at four
pressure levels such as 5 bar, 23 bar, 35 bar, and 38.5
bar simulating motor tail-off, average, maximum expected,
and proof-condition nozzle ejection loads, respectively. At
each chamber pressure, nulling of the actuators were carried
out followed by actuation of A1 actuator, A2 actuator and
combined A1-A2 actuation. The sequence of pressurization
was 5 bar, 23 bar, 38.5 bar and 35 bar. Therefore whenever
various data are presented in the main text, the above
pressures sequence would be followed. For, the 38.5 bar
chamber pressure test, the combined A1-A2 actuation was
not carried out, because this would subject the FNS beyond
the design limits. Moreover, it was estimated that the strains
developed in the flex seal during the combined A1-A2
actuation at 35 bar was more than the individual actuation
tests at 38.5 bar. Hence, the 38.5 bar test was performed
prior to the 35 bar test.
The 3-D DIC setup, as shown in Fig. 3(b) on top of the
cross-beam assembly, was used for obtaining all the target
parameters. In this setup, two 5 megapixel monochromatic
CCD cameras (Point Grey, Germany make) were used in
tandem with 8 mm fixed focal length lenses (Schneider,
Germany make) arranged at approximately 500 mm above
the target surface for stereoscopic imaging. Random speckle
pattern (Fig. 4(a) and (b)) was generated on an A4 size
1 Thenozzle simulator is a dummy nozzle called as cross beam
assembly. Henceforth, the names nozzle simulator, cross beam
assembly and dummy nozzle will be used interchangeably in the text.
 Exp Tech

Fig. 2 Schematic of the test setup for nozzle vectoring test. The various elements of the test rig are marked. Herein, flex seal is the component
which is under evaluation at various chamber pressures

Fig. 3 Digital photograph of a the cross beam assembly (nozzle simulator) showing both A1 and A2 actuators and axial LVDTs and b the 3-D
DIC setup used during the vectoring test for characterizing the flex nozzle system showing the reference or tracked point
Exp Tech
Fig. 4 Stereo view of the
random patterns as seen from
the top of the dummy nozzle; a
left camera image and b right
camera image. Similarly, c and
d show the circular grid pattern
used for stereo calibration from
the left and right camera views
respectively
white paper using black spray paint and firmly affixed
on the imaging surface with glue. It should be noted that
the above random pattern after gluing would be sufficient
to track rigid body displacements with good accuracy.
To establish the global co-ordinate system in 3-D DIC,
stereo calibration was carried out using standard circular
grid pattern (Fig. 4(c) and (d)) following the procedures
in [32]. Various stereo parameters were stored and fed
to the DIC analysis program VIC3D. During actuation,
images were grabbed remotely and automatically at 0.5 Hz
using VICSNAP [32] fulfilling all the safety protocols. The
imaging area was such selected that sufficient space was
available beyond the random pattern to capture both the
forward and backward strokes of the actuators. The area
covered by the stereo cameras was around 500mm×500mm
measuring approximately about 2000 pixels of the image
frame. The DIC analysis was carried out using 91pixel ×
91pixel subsets with 15 pixels as grid steps. The large
subsets were chosen because of the sparse random pattern
(less density of black dots) used for the measurement. Such
a choice of subset size provides the unique finger prints
desired for image correlation which in turn leads to better
measurement accuracy with smoother displacement fields.
In the current test setup, the in-plane and out of plane
displacement accuracies would be better than 0.025 mm
(considering 0.1 pixel accuracy) and 0.05 mm (considering
0.2 pixel accuracy), respectively. It can be emphasized here
that the procedures in [32] claim better sub-pixel accuracy
than the reported ones.
In the setup of Fig. 3(b), the plane of imaging was the
x-y plane, where the x-axis and y-axis of the DIC co-
ordinate system were almost aligned with the A1 actuator
an A2 actuator motions, respectively. Therefore, during A1-
actuation the trajectory of the reference point would be in
x − z plane (x > z) and during A2 actuation the trajectory
would be in the y −z plane (y > z) plane. The z-coordinates
are the out of plane trajectory data obtained in DIC. The
3-D DIC setup, axially above the cross beam (Fig. 3(b)),
would help in locating the pivot point w.r.t. a reference
point almost passing through the nozzle axis and situated at
the top flat surface of cross beam. The position of the top
surface of cross beam was known, hence it was used as a
geometric reference to measure and interpret the parameters
of interest.
The vectoring tests would generate only rigid body
motion of the cross-beam assembly. Under ideal conditions,
tracking a single reference point on the top of the cross
beam (Fig. 3(b)) would be sufficient to estimate the target
parameters. Hence, the displacements measured from DIC
for the reference point can be interpreted as the trajectory
when the temporal motion is recorded. As seen from
Fig. 4(a) and (b), two perpendicular pencil maker lines
almost aligning the actuator motions were drawn over the
random pattern to have a cursory idea of the physical
reference axes of the actuators. The intersection of these
lines (Fig. 4(a) and (b)) at the nozzle axis was selected as
the reference point/area for tracking its temporal motion
(trajectory). However, since the objective was also to

measure actuation angles from the tilting of the cross beam
assembly, a full field measurement was carried out. An
area of 70mm × 70mm at the intersection of the lines was
analyzed using VIC3D [32] and the displacements were
mapped. Subsequently, data averaged over a smaller area2
of 2mm × 2mm, centering the above reference point, was
extracted to obtain the temporal rigid body motions in the
x, y and z planes. The averaging was intended to increase
the fidelity of the measurement. The trajectory hence would
be truly the dynamic displacement of the smaller area where
averaged data was extracted during the vectoring cycles
representing the reference point.
It is noted that 3-D DIC was introduced as a new measure-
ment scheme to characterize the FNS. Therefore apart from
DIC measurements, the test rig was instrumented with dis-
placement transducers (linearly variable displacement trans-
ducers (LVDT)) and inclinometers as usual. Moreover, the
flex seal was instrumented with strain gauges. Four axial
LVDT were used for measuring the axial motion of the nozzle
simulator and two LVDT were used for measuring the stroke
of the actuators directly. The LVDTs were having 300 mm
stroke with an accuracy of 0.1% of its full range. The vec-
toring test was carried out in angle controlled mode. Hence,
two inclinometers were placed aligning the actuators and
the angle data is used in the feedback control loop. The
parameters estimated through DIC would be compared with
the LVDT measurements in the “Results and Discussion”.
Hence, it would validate the DIC measurements and may
assist in identifying the areas for improvement.
Measurement Procedure
In this section, we present the procedure to be followed
for measuring the pivot point co-ordinates, its excursions,
the actuation angles and symmetry of nozzle motions using
the 3-D DIC data. For estimating all of these parameters
the trajectory of a reference point on the dummy nozzle
(cross-beam assembly) seems sufficient. However, full-field
data would be used for an alternate method of finding the
actuation angles.
Linear Least Squares(LLS) Algorithm for Finding
Pivot Point Coordinates
Herein, a linear least square approach (LLS) is proposed for
finding the position of the pivot point from the trajectories
of a reference point on the cross beam (dummy nozzle).
With the help of 3-D DIC, the motion of a reference point
is tracked during the vectoring sequence. It should be noted
2 A larger area however cannot be chosen for averaging because of the
tilting of the cross beam during actuation.
Exp Tech
that the reference point is an arbitrary point in space which
is only defined in the 3-D DIC axes with co-ordinates (x =
0, y = 0, z = 0). During individual actuation tests of the
actuators the reference point would undergo a 2-D motion
in space describing an arc of a circle in the plane of the
actuators irrespective of the position of the pivot point. If
fortunately the chosen reference point in DIC remains on a
plane containing the pivot point then the center of the circle
can be considered as the pivot point. However, in reality
since the plane containing the pivot point is unknown; the
reference point chosen in DIC would be arbitrarily but
slightly offset from the plane containing the pivot point.
Such a reference point is shown in Fig. 5 on a plane offset
from the plane containing the pivot point in an exaggerated
manner for visual appreciation. In Fig. 5 the motion of
the reference point is assumed in the y − z plane during
actuation. In such a situation, the x, y, and z offsets are
needed for obtaining the co-ordinates of the pivot point and
measuring the pivot radius. A similar situation would also
arise when the combined motion of the actuators are carried
out, i.e. the reference point would follow an arc of a circle
in a resultant plane. If the trajectory data from all the three
actuation tests (A1, A2 and combined A1-A2) at a single
test pressure is considered, one would have three arcs having
three curvatures in space. Two among them are normal to
each other with almost similar curvatures whereas the other
Fig. 5 The trajectory traced by a reference point which does not fall in
the plane containing pivot point is shown. The reference point moves in
y − z plane offset by x distance from the plane containing pivot point.
Here the axes are shown in bold capital X, Y, and Z letters whereas the
co-ordinates are indicated as small letters (x, y, and z)
Exp Tech

one would be resultant of them in a resultant plane. Since,
the motion of the actuators is almost symmetric in all the
axes, it is expected that all the three trajectories would be
part of a sphere, hereafter named as pivot sphere. Similarly,
if the trajectory data for a single actuation stroke (A1 or A2
or combined A1-A2) is considered, it will result in an arc
of a circle having a single curvature. Hence, it is possible
to find the pivot point co-ordinates using classical solid
geometry approach. The methodology for finding the co-
ordinates of pivot point considering all the actuation cycles
is outlined below.
Considering the above discussion, the equation of a
sphere whose center is offset by (x0 , y0 , z0 ) from the origin
is given by
It should be noted here that the location of the reference
point is known from DIC. The unknowns to be determined
are the pivot point co-ordinates (xp , yp , zp ) and the radius
r from the trajectory data obtained with DIC. The trajectory
obtained from DIC contains many points which are all
assumed to be located on the sphere. Considering, the i th
point in the trajectory with co-ordinates (xi , yi , zi ), the
equation of the sphere can be expressed as
(xi − xp )2 + (yi − yp )2 + (zi − zp )2 = r 2 . (3)
Equations (2) and (3) can be used to eliminate r. Thereby,
an expression relating a generalized co-ordinate on the
trajectory, the reference point and the pivot point can be
obtained as

(xi − xr )xp + (yi − yr )yp + (zi − zr )zp

(x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 + (z − z0 )2 = r 2 , (1)
where, x, y, z are the co-ordinates of any point on the sphere
and r is the radius of the sphere.
Now, replacing the co-ordinates of the center of the
sphere in equation (1) with the pivot point co-ordinates
(xp , yp , zp ) and considering the reference point (xr , yr , zr )
as one of the co-ordinates on the sphere, the equation of the
sphere takes the form
(xr − xp )2 + (yr − yp )2 + (zr − zp )2 = r 2 . (2)
1 2 
= (xi + yi2 + zi2 ) − (xr2 + yr2 + zr2 ) .
2
(4)
Equation (4) above contains the unknowns (xp , yp , zp )
on the LHS and the RHS has all measured data from DIC. If
we express the generalized equation (4) for all the points on
the trajectory, we would have a system of linear equations.
The matrix representation of the system of linear equations
can be given as

⎡ ⎤ ⎛1 2 2 ⎞

x1 − xr y1 − yr z1 − zr 2 (x1 + y1 + z1 ) − (xr + yr + zr )
2 2 2 2
⎛ ⎞
⎢ x2 − xr y2 − yr z2 − zr ⎥ xp ⎜ 1 (x 2 + y 2 + z2 ) − (xr2 + yr2 + zr2 ) ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜2 2 2 2 ⎟
⎢ ... ... ... ⎥ ⎝ yp ⎠ =⎜ ... ⎟ (5)
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟
⎣ ... ... ... ⎦ zp 3×1 ⎝ .. ⎠
 
xn − xr yn − yr zn − zr n×3
1
2 (x 2 + y 2 + z2 ) − (x 2 + y 2 + z2 )
n n n r r r n×1

Equation (5) can be expressed in a simplified manner
as AX = B. We need minimum three equations (three
points on the trajectory apart from the reference point) to
obtain a unique solution for (xp , yp , zp ). However, since the
trajectory obtained from DIC contains more than three data
points, the system of linear equations have more equations
than the unknowns. Therefore, a linear least square solution
method has been utilized to obtain the unknowns as
X = (AT A)−1 AT B.
Once the pivot point co-ordinates are determined using
equation (6), the pivot radius can be estimated after
employing equation (2). The procedure described above
is for an arbitrary reference point. However, during the
first cycle of the actuation test, the reference point would
have co-ordinate values as (0, 0, 0). Therefore, the above
set of linear equation (5) would be further simplified by
replacing (xr , yr , zr ) as (0, 0, 0). In this case the data
analysis becomes a simpler.
By considering the entire trajectory during individual
actuation of the actuators and combined actuation, one pivot
center and one pivot radius can be obtained at a single
pressure. Therefore, if we consider the trajectories at various
pressures, the excursion can be found out w.r.t pressure.
In order to find excursions in the individual actuation
cycles, the data from the individual actuator and combined
actuator motion can be considered. In these cases, since the
(6)
trajectory is a part of circle, only two co-ordinates of the
pivot point can be determined using a similar least square
solution like above. The data obtained from each actuator
motion would provide the co-ordinates in the individual
actuator planes. These planar offsets from LLS of a circle
fit (2-D LLS) can be compared with the offsets obtained
from LLS of the sphere fit (3-D LLS) to find out the
extreme excursions in all the pressure cycles. However, in
the individual actuation tests (planar circle LLS), the pivot

radius cannot be found out because the third co-ordinate is
not obtainable from the planar or 2D nature of the arc.
Procedure for Measuring Actuation Angles
The procedure for measuring pivot point co-ordinate
considers the trajectory of a single point. Therefore, by
tracking the reference point alone one can obtain the
actuation angle through vector construction, which is
elaborated below as method-1. Moreover, since 3-D DIC is
able to provide full-field displacement on a flat surface at
the top of the nozzle simulator, it is possible to obtain the
actuation angles directly by measuring the tilt of the dummy
nozzle. The actuation angles from the tilt measurement is
described in method-2 below. The main aim of considering
the two methods of measuring actuation angle is to trace out
the best method of measurement through DIC. Moreover, a
comparison of the DIC measured angles with inclinometer
measurements can be made for validation.
Method-1
The trajectory data obtained from 3-D DIC contains the
extreme points of the forwardand backward motion during
⎛ ⎞
⎜ (xr − xp )(xe − xp ) + (yr − yp )(ye − yp ) + (zr − zp )(ze − zp )
θ ± = cos−1 ⎝   ⎠
(xr − xp )2 + (yr − yp )2 + (zr − zp )2 (xe − xp )2 + (ye − yp )2 + (ze − zp )2
Method-2
The actuation angle can be directly measured by considering
the axial deflection of two points on the dummy nozzle
which are aligned with the actuator planes. Since VIC3D
provides the metric co-ordinate as well as axial deflection
data as a whole field, the measurement is quiet simple.
Herein, two spatial points on the dummy nozzle separated
by a distance ‘li ’ which is aligned to the Ai actuator are
considered for finding the actuation angle of the respective
actuator. Since, the relative axial deflection ‘wi ’ of these
two points can be found out from DIC, the actuation angle
can be obtained as
 
wi
θi± = tan−1 . (10)
li
where i would be 1 or 2 depending upon the actuator
considered.
Exp Tech
vectoring cycles. Since, the pivot point co-ordinates are
already available, the actuation angles can be found out by
simple vector construction considering the co-ordinates of
the reference point and the extreme points of the nozzle
displacement during a vectoring cycle.
Now, considering the co-ordinates of the extreme points
of a stroke as (xe , ye , ze ), the previously defined co-
ordinates of the reference point and pivot point, two vectors
can be constructed as
Mpr = (xr − xp )î + (yr − yp )jˆ + (zr − zp )k̂, and
(7)
Mpe = (xe − xp )î + (ye − yp )jˆ + (ze − zp )k̂,
where Mpr and Mpe are the vectors joining the pivot point to
reference point and pivot point to extreme point of the stroke,
respectively. Here, î, jˆ, and k̂ are the unit normal vectors
along the x, y, and z axes of the DIC co-ordinate system.
Now, the actuation angles θ ± can be estimated from the
dot product of the vectors as
θ ± = cos−1 (Mpr · Mpe ) (8)
where, θ + and θ −
are defined for the forward and backward
strokes, respectively and ‘·’ represents the dot product.
Equation 8 upon using the co-ordinate information can be
expanded as
⎟
(9)
Procedure for Measuring Symmetry of Nozzle
Motion
From the current experimental arrangement, 3-D DIC data
cannot provide the direct measurement of actuation stroke.
However, since a physical point on the nozzle is tracked,
it is possible to infer the symmetry of the nozzle motion.
This parameter would be an indirect indication of the stroke
symmetry. Nevertheless, it would provide a good amount of
confidence in the performance of FNS since direct motion
of the nozzle is interpreted.
For measuring the symmetry of the nozzle motion, the
travel of the tracking point (reference point) from the
mean position (reference position) to the extreme vectored
positions (end points) of the trajectory needs to be measured
which is denoted as d ± . Now, the motion or actual
displacement of the nozzle can be expressed as

d± = (xr − xe )2 + (yr − ye )2 + (zr − ze )2 , (11)
Exp Tech
where d + and d − are the motion (displacement) in the
forward and backward strokes during a vectoring cycle,
respectively. Other symbols have their usual meanings.
The difference of the displacements in the forward and
the backward stroke is named as the asymmetry in the
nozzle motion ’d’ expressed as
 
d = |d + | − |d − | , (12)
where |()| is the absolute value. If both the motions are
considered as positive numbers, then d = d + − d − . In
“Results and Discussion”, the actual stroke from the LVDT
and the 3-D DIC nozzle motion would be compared to
understand the physical behavior of the FNS.
Validation of LLS Algorithm for Locating
Pivot Point
The above mentioned procedures are implemented in a
MATLAB platform. For validation of the codes, a synthetic
trajectory was generated in MATLAB as shown in Fig. 6.
Initially, three arcs were constructed considering the center
of the sphere at (0, 0, 0) and the radius to be 1500 mm.
Two of these arcs were aligned to x and y axes, respectively.
The third arc was generated taking resultant of the first two.
Now, to simulate the DIC data, the center of the sphere is
offset by (0, 0, -1500 mm) to obtain the reference point as
(0, 0, 0). After considering this co-ordinate transformation,
the x and y co-ordinates in the synthetic trajectory vary from
-150 mm to 150 mm, whereas z varies from 7.5 mm to 15
mm, see Fig. 6.
Firstly, the synthetic data as shown in Fig. 6 is used in the
algorithm to obtain the co-ordinates of the pivot point which
could be obtained exactly as (0, 0, -1500 mm) matching with
the co-ordinates of the simulated pivot point. A cut view of
the pivot sphere as obtained using the synthetic data and the
10
0
Z (mm)
−10
−20
150
100
50
0 50
−50
−100
−100
Y(mm) −150 −150
Fig. 6 Synthetic data representing the trajectory of a reference point
in the 3-D space
LLS algorithm is shown in Fig. 7 wherein the trajectory data
and pivot radius can be seen. Hence, the procedure outlined
in the previous section worked fine. Now, to understand
the uncertainty in estimating the pivot point, experimental
random noise of various magnitudes as shown in Fig. 8 is
added to the synthetic trajectory. In addition to these, noise
due to small vibrations of test bed may be added. Therefore,
extra margins for experimental noise were provided for
the uncertainty analysis. The pivot point determined with
various combinations of noise is reported in Table 1. It can
be seen that the in-plane noises have negligible influence on
the pivot point co-ordinates. However, the z-displacement
noise disturbs the pivot point co-ordinates the most. The
combination of x, y, and z displacement noise has almost
a similar effect like the z-noise alone. It is noted that the
reference point undergoes smaller z displacement (7.5 to
15 mm) as compared to the x and y displacements due
to the smaller actuation angles. Therefore, a small noise
in z motion creates a pronounced effect in the pivot point
z-coordinate. Herein, experimental noise of maximum 1
mm in z displacement is considered as an exaggeration to
understand the extreme effects of noise. Similarly, 5 mm
noise in x and y is considered for uncertainty analysis. It is
reiterated here that the in-plane displacement measurement
accuracy with 3-D DIC would be 0.025 mm (considering 0.1
pixel accuracy) and it would be 0.05 mm (considering 0.2
pixel accuracy) in out of plane displacements. Therefore, the
noise assumed for uncertainty analysis may be considered
as a conservative estimate. Table 1 shows that a maximum
uncertainty of 1 mm in the x and y co-ordinates whereas
10 mm in the z co-ordinate occurs in the extreme case
of disturbances. These noise lead to an uncertainty of less
than 1% in determining the actual pivot radius and in
150
100
0
−50
X (mm) Fig. 7 The synthetic data fit to a sphere after using the LLS method.
The three arcs at the top of the sphere denote the actuation in various
planes. The sphere is cut from one side to visualize the location of the
pivot center and the pivot radius
 Exp Tech

Fig. 8 Random noise of 0.5

magnitudes a ± 0.5 mm,

Noise (mm)
b ± 1 mm, and c ± 5 mm were
added to the synthetic data to 0
understand their effect on pivot
point excursions
−0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
(a)
1

Noise (mm)
0

−1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
(b)
5
Noise (mm)

−5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
No of data points in the trajectory
(c)

pivot point z co-ordinate. The uncertainties simulated in the
ongoing section provides further confidence to determine
the pivot point excursions using the proposed procedure
with sufficient accuracy.
data and full-field displacements. The DIC measurements
would be compared with other conventional measurements
available in the test setup.
Pivot Point and Pivot Radius Excursions

Results and Discussion
In this section, the performance parameters for the FNS
as measured from the DIC analysis would be presented.
The co-ordinates of the pivot point and other performance
related quantities were measured using the DIC trajectory
The trajectories as obtained from 3-D DIC at different
chamber pressures are shown in Fig. 9(a). The same data
in x − y, x − z, and y − z planes are shown in Fig. 9(b),
(c), and (d), respectively. Here it is important to note that
the plane of motion of the actuators would slightly deviate
from DIC co-ordinate axes unlike the synthetic trajectory.

Table 1 Effect of random noise on the determination of pivot point co-ordinates and the excursions

Noise in Noise in xp yp zp
x and y (mm) z mm mm mm mm

±0.5 0 0 0 −1499.7
±1 0 0 −0.1 −1499.5
±5 0 −0.1 0.6 −1498.2
0 ± 0.5 −0.4 0.3 −1501.3
0 ±1 −0.8 0.6 −1492.6
± 0.5 ± 0.5 −0.4 0.4 −1500.9
±1 ±1 −0.8 0.8 −1491.9
±5 ±1 −0.7 0.15 −1490.1

Excursions 0.7 0.9 11.2

Exp Tech

Fig. 9 The trajectory of the 5 bar 23 bar 35 bar 38.5 bar

reference point on top of the
cross beam during the actuation 150
tests at various pressures are 100
shown in a xyz space, b xy 20

Z Disp (mm)

Y Disp(mm)
plane, c xz plane, and d yz plane, 50
10
respectively. In these trajectories 0
A1 and A2-actuation are almost 0
aligning with the x and y axes −50
−10
−100
100
0 100 −150
0 −150 −100 −50 0 50 100 150
−100 −100
Y Disp(mm) X Disp(mm) X Disp(mm)
(a) (b)

20 20

Z Disp (mm) 10 10

0 0

−10 −10

−150 −100 −50 0 50 100 150 −150 −100 −50 0 50 100 150
X Disp(mm) Y Disp(mm)
(c) (d)

It is practically difficult to align one axis of DIC with the
actuator movement as the test was conducted remotely and
the DIC setup was already mounted. Therefore a slight
shifting of DIC axes from the actuator axes is expected
(Fig. 9(b), (c), and (d)). Nevertheless, it is always possible
to find the trajectory of the point in the plane of actuation
by considering suitable resultant displacements from DIC.
The co-ordinates of the reference point and the pivot
point obtained considering the entire trajectory of A1,
A2 and combined A1-A2 actuation in the the 3-D LLS
algorithm at various pressures are reported in Table 2. In
Table 2, x, y, and z co-ordinates signify the locations of
the pivot point with respect to the tracked point (reference
point). By considering the whole data set, if it is assumed
that the x and y axes match with the A1 and A2 actuator
planes and the z axis matches with the axis of the nozzle,
then the co-ordinates can be interpreted in a straight forward
manner. For instance, x > 0 means the pivot point is on the
right of the reference point as observed from the cameras
on the top of the dummy nozzle, similarly y > 0 means the
pivot point is vertically above the reference point and z < 0
implies the pivot point is axially below the reference point
and vice-versa.
Herein, a slight digression is made to compare the axial
displacement from DIC and the averaged displacement of
four axial LVDTs (Fig. 10). It is evident from Fig. 9
and Table 2 that the reference point lifts upwards when
the pressure in the chamber increases. Actually, the flex
seal gets compressed when the chamber pressure increases,
thereby causing an axial upward rigid body motion of
the dummy nozzle. Figure 10 shows a good agreement of
DIC with LVDT measurements. In this figure, a hysteretic
behavior of the axial displacement was seen in both the
measurements. Since, the flex seal is a pressure tight
flexible joint consisting of alternate layers of steel shims
and rubber, it is expected that the rubber would show

Table 2 Co-ordinates of Reference point (tracking point) and pivot point obtained at various pressures

Pressure Reference Point Co-ordinate Pivot Point Co-ordinate Pivot Radius

(bar) xr (mm) yr (mm) zr (mm) xp (mm) yp (mm) zp (mm) r (mm)

5 0 0 0 8.97 2.23 −1460.59 1460.62

23 −0.26 −0.2 12.68 7.78 1.48 −1460.86 1460.88
38.5 −0.03 0.01 22. 22 7.6 0.76 −1447.45 1447.47
35 0.53 0.25 21.46 7.37 0.45 −1433.56 1433.58

Excursions 1.6 1.78 27.03 27.3


25
DIC−Actuation
DIC−Unloading
20
LVDT
Axial Lift (Z disp, mm)
15
10
5
0 Now, since the information about the pivot point, the
−5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Pressure (bar)
Fig. 10 Measurement of the lift of the nozzle simulator at various
pressures during pressurization and depressurization as compared with
the LVDT measurements
viscoelastic behavior. Under such material behavior, the
observed hysteretic behavior is justified. Such behavior was
also reported in Ref. [23]. Here, it must be noted that the
displacement at 0.6 bar pressure is negative owing to the
fact that the DIC reference image was taken at 5 bar and the
LVDT data was also adjusted accordingly. From the above
inferences it is clear that DIC would be able to provide
axial displacements equivalent to the LVDTs. Moreover, the
accuracy of DIC measurements in the current experiments
would be better than LVDTs having 300 mm stroke. Hence,
these LVDTs are can be replaced with 3-D DIC. Such a
simplification of test rig instrumentation can save time and
resources.
Now, the excursion data from Table 2 shows that the
excursions in xp and yp co-ordinates are less than 2 mm
whereas the excursions in zp and r are less than 30 mm.
The pivot radi ‘r’ 3 measured are within the design range
and the excursions seen are much smaller than anticipated.
To estimate the extreme excursions, the trajectory data
in A1, A2 and A1-A2 actuation cycles were considered
individually for circle fit using the LLS algorithm and the
excursions were estimated as reported in Table 3. In the
individual actuation data, to compensate for the offset from
A1 and A2 planes, the resultant of the in-plane x and y
data were considered in Table 3 to align it with the actuator
planes. It was seen that the in-plane offsets have negligible
influence on the excursions. The excursions in the A1,
A2 and A1-A2 combined planes the were less than 3 mm
whereas the axial excursion was increased to almost 77 mm.
3 The line joining the pivot point to the reference point is the pivot
radius; see Fig. 7 from the cut side.
Exp Tech
However, with these stringent estimations of pivot point
excursions also, the magnitude is less than 80 mm which is
comparable with the values reported in [23]. The excursion
in the axial co-ordinate is around 5% of the pivot radius.
Such an excursion is acceptable for FNS based nozzles
because of the constructional limitations of the flex seal.
Moreover, such small excursions are already addressed in
the dynamic envelope of the nozzle during design.
Estimation of Actuation Angles
extremes of dummy nozzle displacement and reference
point are available, the actuation angles can be estimated
30 35 40
using method-1 given by equation (9). Similarly the direct
measurement of the tilting of the dummy nozzle as
described in the method-2 given by equation (10) can be
estimated from the full-field data. The actuation angles
measured from both the methods are reported in Table 4.
In this table, data for both forward as well as backward
strokes are shown for each actuator at various pressures.
The maximum angular asymmetry recorded from method-
1 is 0.05◦ which is less than 1% of the one sided stroke.
However, the asymmetry from method-2 was somewhat
larger (0.25 degrees) which amounts to 4.4% of the one-
sided stroke. Moreover, Table 4 shows a decreasing trend
in the actuation angle as the chamber pressure increases
as per method-1 (except at 35 bar). Such a trend is not
seen from method-2 and the actuation angles are almost
repeatable in this method at all chamber pressures. Since,
the tests were conducted in an angle controlled mode, one
does not expect any change in the actuation angle. The
trends seen using method-1 is inherent to the equation (9)
used for calculating the angles. This formula uses the pivot
point and the reference point co-ordinates in it. These co-
ordinates does not remain same at all pressures. Moreover,
pivot point being a floating point shows large excursions.
Therefore, method-2 being a direct method, it is preferable
while estimating the actuation angles.
The actuator angles obtained using method-2 in Table 4
are smaller than the anticipated actuation angle of 5.5◦ . It
must be noted that for the closed loop feedback control,
data from two inclinometers placed 90◦ apart aligning
the actuators were used. These inclinometers were offset
from the axis of the dummy nozzle and was placed on a
platform 1 meter below the 3-D DIC measurement. Since,
the inclinometer was the only option to control the actuators,
the feedback taken from this measurement actually may not
reflect the actual vectored angles. This feedback control also
effects the actuator strokes as would be seen in the next
section (Table 5). The DIC measured actuation angles which
almost coincides with the axis of the nozzle shows some
deficit and asymmetry in the angles in A1 and A2 axes.
Exp Tech

Table 3 The co-ordinates of the pivot point at various chamber pressures and the excursions in each co-ordinate (shown in the bottom most row)

Pressure Actuation A1-axis A2-axis A1+A2 Vehicle Remarks

(bar) Cycle (mm) (mm) resultant Axis - z
axis (mm) (mm)

5 All data 8.97 2. 23 − −1460. 59 Sphere fit

A1 9 − − −1431.69 Circle fit
A2 − 3.08 − −1470.5 Circle fit
A1+A2 - − 7.72 −1460.59 Circle fit
23 All data 7.78 1.48 − −1460.86 Sphere fit
A1 8.12 − − −1415.24 Circle fit
A2 − 2 − −1456.6 Circle fit
A1+A2 − − 6.45 −1462.87 Circle fit
38.5 All data 7.6 0.76 − −1447.45 Sphere fit
A1 7.42 − − −1419.72 Circle fit
A2 − 0.98 − −1453.97 Circle fit
35 All data 7.37 0.45 − −1433.56 Sphere fit
A1 7.66 − − −1393.96 Circle fit
A2 − 1.21 - −1454.4 Circle fit
A1+A2 − − 5.38 −1455.21 Circle fit
Excursions 1.63 2.63 2.34 76.54 abs(max-min)

Therefore, there is a scope to use DIC data to address this
deficiency in future tests.
Estimating the Symmetry of Nozzle Motion
Since, the tests are conducted in the angle controlled mode
using inclinometer feedback, it is expected that it would
have an impact on the stroke symmetry of the FNS as
highlighted in the previous section. It is noted that DIC
data cannot measure the actuator strokes directly unlike the
LVDTs used for this purpose. However, since DIC is track-
ing the actual motion of the dummy nozzle, it is possible to
interpret the stroke symmetry from this motion. To under-
stand such behavior the actual displacement (d ± ) of the DIC

Table 4 Actuation angles obtained using method-1 and method-2 at various pressures during the forward and backwards strokes of the actuators

Pressure Actuation Method-1 Method-2

Actuation angle Asymmetry Actuation angle Asymmetry

(bar) Cycle θ + (◦ ) θ − (◦ ) θ (◦ ) θ + (◦ ) θ − (◦ ) θ (◦ )
abs abs abs abs

5 A1 5.57 5.55 0.02 5.34 5.39 0.05

A2 5.61 5.62 0.01 5.6 5.39 0.21
A1+A2 7.88 7.89 0.01 5.47 + 5.37 5.43 + 5.2
=7.67 = 7.52 0.15
23 A1 5.45 5.40 0.05 5.32 5.37 0.05
A2 5.46 5.45 0.01 5.6 5.37 0.23
A1+A2 7.67 7.65 0.02 5.44 + 5.34 5.35 + 5.13
=7.63 = 7.43 0.2
38.5 A1 5.36 5.33 0.01 5.32 5.35 0.03
A2 5.39 5.39 0 5.62 5.37 0.25
35 A1 5.40 5.43 0.03 5.32 5.35 0.03
A2 5.44 5.46 0.02 5.61 5.37 0.24
A1+A2 7.65 7.68 0.03 5.42 + 5.34 5.3 + 5.1
= 7.61 = 7.37 0.24
 Exp Tech

Table 5 Symmetry of nozzle motion (d ± , Equation (12)) and stroke symmetry (LVDT) measured at various pressures

Pressure Actuation DIC Forward DIC Backward d LVDT Forward LVDT Backward s
(bar) Cycle motion (d + ) motion (d − ) (mm) Stroke (s + ) Stroke (s − ) (mm)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

5 A1 142.01 −141.36 0.65 142.69 −144.17 1.48

A2 143.04 −143.06 0.02 143.87 −145.10 1.23
A1+A2 200.61 −200.89 0.28 201.31 −205.90 4.59
23 A1 139.97 −138.83 1.13 141.26 −142.94 1.68
A2 140.35 −140.20 0.16 143.56 −144.27 0.71
A1+A2 197.18 −196.67 0.51 200.27 204.16 3.89
38.5 A1 137.48 −136.73 0.76 139.71 143.06 3.35
A2 138.28 −138.27 0.02 141.25 144.62 3.38
35 A1 137.16 −137.90 0.73 139.51 142.62 3.11
A2 138.18 −138.61 0.44 141.44 145.31 3.87
A1+A2 194.07 −194.90 0.83 197.11 206.45 9.35

The forward stroke generates d + and s + and vice-versa

reference point and the direct strokes (s ± ) of LVDTs placed
on the actuators were compared for the forward as well as
backward strokes. The DIC measured motions were esti-
mated for each individual actuators at various pressure using
equation (12). The DIC data and LVDT data are reported
in Table 5. A maximum asymmetry from DIC data was
1.13 mm (less than 1% of single sided motion) whereas
the direct strokes measured from LVDT showed much
larger asymmetry. Such a behavior in the strokes might be
the result of the angle controlled actuation, the asymme-
try in the mounting the actuators and slight misalignment
of the LVDTs from the actuator axis. Nevertheless, the
DIC measured nozzle motion shows a better symmetry and
provides more confidence in the FNS design and functional-
ity. The actuation angle data reported in the previous section
also corroborates well with the symmetry in nozzle motion.
From Table 5 it can be inferred that the nozzle displace-
ment (d ± ) are 2 mm to 3 mm smaller than the actuator
strokes (s ± ) measured from the LVDTs. It must be noted
that the pivot radius measured with DIC was little lesser than
1500 mm, whereas the actuator axes was at a distance of
1500 mm from the pivot point (Fig. 2). The reference point
on the dummy nozzle inherently creates such a deficiency
in the radial position, which results in the above observa-
tion. Apart from this inference, the DIC displacements are
analogous to the strokes of the actuators.
Concluding Remarks
A stereoscopic 3-D DIC system was successfully utilized
for estimating performance parameters of a FNS system
namely (i) pivot point excursions, (ii) actuation angles, and
(iii) symmetry of nozzle motion in a single setup. One of the
primary data required for estimating the above parameters
was the co-ordinates of the pivot point. In this paper, a
procedure involving linear least squares (LLS) is developed
for this purpose. The procedure developed is validated with
simulated trajectory data and the experimental uncertainties
were quantified. This procedure was used in finding the
excursions of the pivot point and pivot radius from the
trajectory of a reference point on the nozzle simulator. The
excursions in the pivot radius and pivot point axial co-
ordinate were less than 30 mm (< 2%) and 80 mm (< 6%),
respectively. Similarly, the asymmetry in the actuation angle
and nozzle motion were less than 1%. The excursions of
the pivot point estimated in this paper are inline with [23],
however the proposed procedure is lot simpler than Ref.
[23]. Moreover, in Ref. [23] only pivot point excursions
were reported without determining the actual co-ordinates
of the pivot point or the pivot radius. The efforts for
obtaining many performance parameters from only one 3-D
DIC setup simplifies the instrumentation scheme.
The performance parameters reported here provides
confidence on the design and configuration of the FNS.
The use of a stereoscopic 3-D DIC system and the
simple algorithms made the measurements easier and faster.
Moreover, the 3-D DIC setup can provide the axial lift of the
dummy nozzle as additional data. Hence it provides a scope
to simplify the existing testing protocol by replacing the
axial LVDT with DIC. Moreover, in future, attempts would
be made to provide real-time actuation angles from DIC
as input for controlling the nozzle actuation. Therefore, the
proposed method is expected to overcome the complexities
in instrumentation, difficulties in data reduction and man-
hour requirements in the existing methods. The proposed
Exp Tech
procedures is planned to be followed for characterizing
future FNS to reduce the instrumentation requirements
during testing.
Acknowledgements The authors have great pleasure in acknowledg-
ing the support rendered by Mr. S Karthigai Selvan, Sr. Tech. Asst.
and Mr S N Suresh, Sr. Technician, both from ETS/EXMD, VSSC
for their support during test and data generation. The authors specially
acknowledge Mr. V. Eswaran, Deputy Director, Solid Propulsion and
Research (SPR) Entity (also Project Director, S200 Project), VSSC
for his encouragement, internal review of the manuscript and valuable
suggestions. The LVDT and other instrumentation support provided
by Mr Dhrishit M P, PRG/SPR Entity, VSSC and his team during the
vectoring test of S200 flex seals is also acknowledged.
References
1. Woodberry RFH (1975) Flexible joints for thrust vector controls,
AIAA and SAE 11th Propulsion Conference, Anaheim, California
AIAA-75-1221
2. Kobalter GF Flexible nozzle for a thrust vector control system, US
Patent No - US3860134 A
3. Nagappa R, Kurup MR, Muthunayagam AE (1989) ISRO’S solid
rocket motors. Acta Astronaut 19(8):681–697
4. Report NASA (1974) Solid rocket thrust vector control NASA-
SP-8114
5. Donat JR (1993) Solid rocket motor nozzle flexseal design sen-
sitivity, AIAA, AHS, and ASEE, Aerospace Design Conference,
Irvine, California AIAA-93-1122
6. Yongbin Z (2007) Discussion on control precision of single swing
nozzle. Mod Def Technol 35(3):54–57
7. Sutton MA, Orteu JJ, Schrier HW (2009) Image correlation for
shape, motion and deformation measurement. Springer, USA
8. Bornert M, Hild F, Orteu JJ, Roux S (2012) Digital Image
Correlation. In: Grediac M, Hild F, Pineau A (Eds) Full-Field
Measurements and Identification in Solid Mechanics. Wiley-
ISTE, chapter 6, pp 157–190
9. Peters WH, Ranson WF (1982) Digital image techniques in
experimental stress analysis. Opt Eng 21(3):427–431
10. Peters WH, Ranson WF, Sutton MA, Chu TC, Anderson J
(1983) Application Of Digital Correlation Methods To Rigid Body
Mechanics. Opt Eng 22(6):226738
11. Kahn-Jetter ZL, Chu TC (1990) Three-dimensional displacement
measurements using digital image correlation and photogrammet-
ric analysis. Exp Mech 30(1):10–16
12. Luo PF, Chao YJ, Sutton MA, Peters WH (1993) Accurate
measurement of three-dimensional deformations in deformable
and rigid bodies using computer vision. Exp Mech 33(2):123–
132
13. Cardenas-Garcia JF, Yao HG, Zheng S (1995) 3D Reconstruction
of objects using stereo imaging. Opt Lasers Eng 22(3):193–213
14. Helm JD, McNeill SR, Sutton MA (1996) Improved three-
dimensional image correlation for surface displacement measure-
ment. Opt Eng 35(7):1911–1920
15. Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Helm JD, Chao YJ (2000) Advances
in two-dimensional and three-dimensional computer vision. In:
Rastogi PK (ed) Photomechanics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg,
pp 323–372
16. Orteu JJ (2009) 3-D Computer vision in experimental mechanics.
Opt Lasers Eng 47(34):282–291
17. Quan C, Tay C, Sun W, He X (2008) Determination of three-
dimensional displacement using two-dimensional digital image
correlation. Appl Opt 47(4):583–593
18. Xia S, Gdoutou A, Ravichandran G (2013) Diffraction assisted
image correlation: a novel method for measuring three-
dimensional deformation using two-dimensional digital image
correlation. Exp Mech 53(5):755–765
19. Pan B, Yu LP, Zhang QB (2018) Review of single-camera stereo-
digital image correlation techniques for full-field 3D shape and
deformation measurement. Sci China Tech Sci 61(1):2–20
20. Li J, Dan X, Xu W, Wang Y, Yang G, Yang L (2017) 3D Digital
image correlation using single color camera pseudo-stereo system.
Opt Laser Technol 95:1–7
21. Li J, Zhang B, Kang X, Xu W, Yang G, Yang L (2018) Single
camera 3D digital image correlation using a polarized system.
Instrum Exp Tech 61(1):99–105
22. Zhong FQ, Shao XX, Quan C (2018) 3D digital image correlation
using a single 3-CCD colour camera and dichroic filter. Measur
Sci Technol 29(4):045401
23. Gaffin RD (1977) Space shuttle solid rocket booster nozzle
flexible seal pivot point dynamics, AIAA/SAE 13th Propulsion
Conference, Florida, AIAA-P-77–986
24. Yoo JS (2010) First Korea space launch vehicle kick motor
movable nozzle motion. J Space Craft Rocket 47(1):153–168
25. Zhang LF, Guo YB, Chen G, Ye D, Chen RS (2010) Estimation
of nozzle axis and vector angle by infrared photoelectric
measurement technology. J Harbin Inst Technol 42(1):24–28
26. Seely J, Torick R, Mascio W (1990) Nozzle vector angle determina-
tion using a laser measurement system, AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE
26th Joint Propulsion Conference, Orlando, Florida, AIM-90-2082
27. Zhang CF, Tang WY, Li HP, Wang J, Chen JC (2007) Application
of laser tracker to thrust line measurement of solid rocket motor. J
Solid Rocket Technol 30(6):548–551
28. Guo Y, Chen G, Ye D, Yu X, Yuan F (2013) 2-DOF angle
measurement of rocket nozzle with multivision, Advanced
Mechanical Engineering, Article ID 942580. Hindwai Publication,
Cairo. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/942580J
29. Qu Y, Yang H (2015) High-speed measurement of nozzle
swing angle of rocket engine based on monocular vision, Ninth
International Symposium on Precision Engineering Measurement
and Instrumentation. Proc SPIE 9446(1–9):944647
30. Guo Y, Ye D, Chen G, Yuan F (2012) Binocular vision-vased
measurement for motion parameters of rocket nozzle. Appl Mech
Mater 220–223:1056–1061
31. Wang X, Tan J, Zhao Q, Ling Q (2015) Computer vision-based
swing center testing method for flexible joint, Seventh Interna-
tional Symposium on Precision Mechanical Measurements. Proc
SPIE 9903(1–7):990320
32. VIC3D and VICSNAP The 3-D DIC commerical code and the
image cpaturing software, Supplied by M/s Correlated Solutions,
USA