Virtual Sensors Based on Finite Element Method: Balancing Accuracy, Runtime and Offline Effort
Source abstract
Abstract
Access to internal fields such as stress, temperature, and fatigue indicators is essential for condition monitoring, yet direct sensing is often impractical. Finite element method (FEM)-based virtual sensors address this gap by combining sparse measurements with physics-based models. This work compares two virtual sensor workflows. The live FEM approach executes a model on demand and provides high-fidelity estimates at the cost of multi-second runtimes. The lookup database approach shifts computation offline by precomputing responses and answering online queries by fast interpolation. We introduce a quantitative cost model that links measured runtime scaling, offline construction effort, and online latency to deployment choices. The cost model is evaluated through timing studies, accuracy assessments, and an empirical break-even analysis relating offline effort to the expected number of online queries. Two case studies illustrate the method, a nonlinear tension-bar benchmark and a steady-state thermal model of a CPU die. Live FEM runtime follows a power law with α≈1.2 for the tensile case and an effective α≈0.66 for the CPU case due to dominant overheads. The resulting rules translate accuracy targets and latency budgets into workflow-selection criteria that support integration into digital-twin and monitoring pipelines.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Model Reduction and Neural Networks · Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques · Machine Learning in Materials Science
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Engineering Design and CAD, University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstraße 30, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany
Funding
Bayerische Transformations-und Forschungsstiftung
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Virtual Sensors10.1007/s12599-021-00689-w ↗
2. Kabadayi, S., Pridgen, A., and Julien, C. (2006). Virtual Sensors: Abstracting Data from Physical Sensors. Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM’06), Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY, USA, 26–29 June 2006, IEEE.10.1109/WOWMOM.2006.115 ↗
3. Battery digital twins: Perspectives on the fusion of models, data and artificial intelligence for smart battery management systems10.1016/j.egyai.2020.100016 ↗
4. Literature review of digital twin technologies for civil infrastructure
5. Virtual sensors for control applications10.1016/S1367-5788(02)80018-9 ↗
6. Roque Rolo, G., Dionisio Rocha, A., Tripa, J., and Barata, J. (2021). Application of a Simulation-Based Digital Twin for Predicting Distributed Manufacturing Control System Performance. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11052202 ↗
7. Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.474 ↗
8. Digital Twin in Industry: State-of-the-Art10.1109/TII.2018.2873186 ↗
9. National Academies Press (US) (2024). Foundational Research Gaps and Future Directions for Digital Twins, National Academies Press.
10. Marinkovic, D., and Zehn, M. (2019). Survey of Finite Element Method-Based Real-Time Simulations. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9142775 ↗
11. Sun, Z., Jayasinghe, S., Sidiq, A., Shahrivar, F., Mahmoodian, M., and Setunge, S. (2024). Approach Towards the Development of Digital Twin for Structural Health Monitoring of Civil Infrastructure: A Comprehensive Review. Sensors, 25.10.3390/s25010059 ↗
12. Efficient three-node finite shell element for linear and geometrically nonlinear analyses of piezoelectric laminated structures10.1177/1045389X17705538 ↗
13. In situ virtual sensors in building digital twins: Framework and methodology
14. Hoang, P., and Guccione, J. (2025). Finite Element Modeling in Left Ventricular Cardiac Biomechanics: From Computational Tool to Clinical Practice. Bioengineering, 12.10.3390/bioengineering12090913 ↗
15. Llopis-Albert, C., Rubio, F., Devece, C., and García-Hurtado, D. (2024). Digital Twin-Based Approach for a Multi-Objective Optimal Design of Wind Turbine Gearboxes. Mathematics, 12.10.20944/preprints202403.1774.v1 ↗
16. Strain virtual sensor for offshore wind turbine jacket supports: A time series transformer approach validated with Alpha Ventus wind farm data10.1016/j.ymssp.2025.112653 ↗
17. Bashir, A., Mohsin, M.A., Jazib, M., and Iqbal, H. (2023). MINDTwin AI: Multiphysics Informed Digital-Twin for Fault Localization in Induction Motor Using AI. Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Big Data, Knowledge and Control Systems Engineering (BdKCSE), Sofia, Bulgaria, 2–3 November 2023, IEEE.10.1109/BdKCSE59280.2023.10339747 ↗
18. Virtual sensing-enabled digital twin framework for real-time monitoring of nuclear systems leveraging deep neural operators10.1038/s41529-025-00557-y ↗
19. Physics-based and data-driven hybrid modeling in manufacturing: A review
20. Physics-Informed and Hybrid Machine Learning in Additive Manufacturing: Application to Fused Filament Fabrication10.1007/s11837-020-04438-4 ↗
21. Approximating CFD simulations of natural ventilation: A deep surrogate model with spatial attention mechanism10.1016/j.jobe.2025.112425 ↗
22. Real-time structural model updating using local eigenvalue modification procedure for applications in high-rate dynamic events10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110318 ↗
23. Zhao, Y., Zhang, G., Zang, G., Zhang, G., Sang, W., Zhang, S., and Li, W. (2023). Monitoring Bridge Dynamic Deformation Law Based on Digital Photography and Ground-Based RAR Technology. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app131910838 ↗
24. Zhang, K., Qing, J., Jin, H., and Jin, H. (2025). Digital Twin-Enabled Predictive Thermal Modeling for Stator Temperature Monitoring in Induction Motors. Electronics, 14.10.3390/electronics14142814 ↗
25. Initial Population Influence on Hypervolume Convergence of NSGA-III10.2507/IJSIMM20-1-549 ↗
26. Smart Sampling Algorithm for Surrogate Model Development10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.10.006 ↗
27. To Sobol or not to Sobol? The effects of sampling schemes in systems biology applications10.1016/j.mbs.2021.108593 ↗
28. Vabalas, A., Gowen, E., Poliakoff, E., and Casson, A.J. (2019). Machine learning algorithm validation with a limited sample size. PLoS ONE, 14.10.1371/journal.pone.0224365 ↗
29. Dimensional Accuracy and Mechanical Characterization of Inconel 625 Components in Atomic Diffusion Additive Manufacturing10.3390/applmech5020022 ↗
30. (2020). Metallic Materials—Tensile Testing—Part 1: Method of Test at Room Temperature (ISO 6892-1:2019); German Version EN ISO 6892-1:2019 (Standard No. DIN EN ISO 6892-1:2020-06).
31. Bathe, K.-J. (2014). Finite Element Procedures, K. J. Bathe. [2nd ed.].
32. Full-Chip Power Density and Thermal Map Characterization for Commercial Microprocessors Under Heat Sink Cooling10.1109/TCAD.2021.3088081 ↗
33. Bergman, T.L., and Lavine, A.S. (2019). Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, Wiley. [8th ed.].
34. Raicu, I., Foster, I.T., and Zhao, Y. (2008). Many-task computing for grids and supercomputers. Proceedings of the 2008 Workshop on Many-Task Computing on Grids and Supercomputers (MTAGS), Austin, TX, USA, 17 November 2008, IEEE.10.1109/MTAGS.2008.4777912 ↗
35. Real-time biomechanics using the finite element method and machine learning: Review and perspective10.1002/mp.14602 ↗
36. Building high accuracy emulators for scientific simulations with deep neural architecture search10.1088/2632-2153/ac3ffa ↗
37. Quarteroni, A., Manzoni, A., and Negri, F. (2015). Reduced Basis Methods for Partial Differential Equations: An Introduction, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-15431-2 ↗
38. Scalable Nearest Neighbor Algorithms for High Dimensional Data10.1109/TPAMI.2014.2321376 ↗
39. Choosing the Sample Size of a Computer Experiment: A Practical Guide10.1198/TECH.2009.08040 ↗
40. Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization10.1016/j.paerosci.2008.11.001 ↗
41. Kern, J., and Vetter, J.S. (2015). Scientific benchmarking of parallel computing systems. Proceedings of the SC15: The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, Austin, TX, USA, 15–20 November 2015, ACM.
42. Scheunemann, L., and Faust, E. (2025). A manifold learning approach to nonlinear model order reduction of quasi-static problems in solid mechanics: Proof of concept and parameter study. Comput. Mech, online ahead of print.10.1007/s00466-025-02696-0 ↗