Comparison of Iterative and Non-Iterative Strain-Gage Balance Load Calculation Methods

The accuracy of iterative and non-iterative strain-gage balance load calculation methods was compared using data from the calibration of a force balance. Two iterative and one non-iterative method were investigated. In addition, transformations were applied to balance loads in order to process the calibration data in both direct read and force balance format. NASA's regression model optimization tool BALFIT was used to generate optimized regression models of the calibration data for each of the three load calculation methods. This approach made sure that the selected regression models met strict statistical quality requirements. The comparison of the standard deviation of the load residuals showed that the first iterative method may be applied to data in both the direct read and force balance format. The second iterative method, on the other hand, implicitly assumes that the primary gage sensitivities of all balance gages exist. Therefore, the second iterative method only works if the given balance data is processed in force balance format. The calibration data set was also processed using the non-iterative method. Standard deviations of the load residuals for the three load calculation methods were compared. Overall, the standard deviations show very good agreement. The load prediction accuracies of the three methods appear to be compatible as long as regression models used to analyze the calibration data meet strict statistical quality requirements. Recent improvements of the regression model optimization tool BALFIT are also discussed in the paper.