Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Fig. 5.7 Shape parameter c
effect on the V1P3 NNRPIM
solution accuracy. a Regular
nodal distribution. b Irregular
nodal distribution.
Logarithmic scales
1.0E+03
(a)
E
f
med
tot
1.0E+00
1.0E-03
1.0E-06
1.0E-09
γ
1.0E-12
1.0E-04
1.0E-03
1.0E-02
1.0E-01
1.0E+00
1.0E+01
1.0E+03
(b)
E
f
med
tot
1.0E+00
1.0E-03
1.0E-06
1.0E-09
γ
1.0E-12
1.0E-04
1.0E-03
1.0E-02
1.0E-01
1.0E+00
1.0E+01
Next, NNRPIM formulations considering second degree influence-cells are
studied. The procedure is similar to the previous NNRPIM formulations optimi-
zation studies. For V2P0 NNRPIM formulation, the results of the patch test
concerning the optimization of the MQ-RBF shape parameter c are presented in
Fig.
5.11
. The MQ-RBF shape parameter c optimization results regarding the
V2P1, the V2P3 and the V2P6 NNRPIM formulations are shown respectively in
Figs.
5.12
,
5.13
and
5.14
.
It is possible to observe in Figs.
5.11
and
5.12
that the optimization curves of
the V2P0 and V2P1 NNRPIM formulations stabilize for shape parameters values
c
0
:
1. Regarding the V2P3 and V2P6 NNRPIM formulations, Figs.
5.13
and
5.14
show that these NNRPIM formulations are not capable to construct RPI shape
functions possessing the Kronecker delta property when c [ 0
:
1. Therefore, for all
