Search for: All records

Wearable stretch sensors have potential applications across many fields including medicine and sports, but the accuracy of the data produced by the sensors over repeated uses is largely unknown due to a paucity of high-cycle fatigue (HCF) studies on both the materials comprising the sensors and the signal produced by the sensors. To overcome these limitations, using human physiologically-based parameters, stretch sensors were subjected to quasi-static testing and HCF with simultaneous capture of the signal. The strain produced by the sensor was then compared to the strain produced by testing instrument, and the results suggest that the output from the stretch sensors is strongly correlated with output from the testing instrument under quasi-static conditions; however, this correlation deteriorates under fatigue conditions. Such deterioration may be the result of several factors, including a mismatch between the material response to fatiguing and the signal response to fatiguing. From a materials perspective, the shape of the stress-life curve for the polymers comprising the sensors conforms to the Rabinowitz-Beardmore model of polymer fatigue. Based on these results, consideration of the material properties of a stretch sensor are necessary to determine how accurate the output from the sensor will be for a given application.

Co‐production practices are increasingly being adopted in research conducted for the purpose of societal impact. However, the ways in which co‐production is conducted can perpetuate long‐standing inequity and inequality. This study investigates which principles of co‐production design are perceived to advance more equitable processes and outcomes based on the experiences of participants in three projects funded by U.S. federal programs that support decision‐relevant climate science, along with others engaged in co‐production efforts. We found three distinct perspectives: (a) Ways of Knowing and Power; (b) Participants and Interactions; and (c) Science as Capacity Building. Each viewpoint differentially weights the salience of statements associated with five dimensions of co‐production practices: (a) outcomes; (b) power; (c) place‐based, community rights and respect; (d) audiences and participation; and (e) interactions. In the final stage of the study, we hosted a workshop of participants representing various roles in co‐production efforts to vet and discuss each perspective. We found that the perspectives remained distinct after each of the groups selected core statements that reflect their views. The degree of variation across the three perspectives suggests that co‐production processes would benefit from an initial discussion of, and decisions about, rules of engagement to ensure that participants view the process as equitable.