Search

This paper examines the applicability of the hot spot method using a small wireless system and the effect of data loss during data communication on fatigue evaluation. Fatigue failure is a phenomenon that progresses due to repeated loading. Since it is not practical to monitor all structural members, it is important to monitor the structural integrity of damage-prone areas. In addition, due to cost and installation space constraints, the use of inexpensive, compact IoT devices is effective. Compact wireless fatigue monitoring methods using strain gauges have been proposed, and systems based on the nominal stress method have been considered. However, there are cases where the nominal stress cannot be defined due to the complex structure of the weldment, making fatigue evaluation difficult. In such cases, the hot spot method, which measures the structural stress concentration, is effective. However, the application of the hot spot method to a small wireless monitoring system has not been sufficiently studied. In this paper, a small wireless monitoring system was fabricated and its applicability to fatigue evaluation of welded joints was confirmed. From the test results, it was confirmed that the data loss was caused by the data communication condition of the small wireless system and the accumulated fatigue damage degree was underestimated. It is necessary to select an appropriate small wireless monitoring system considering the information on fatigue and stress state required for the target structure. This selection should consider the trade-off between transmitting raw data and performing edge processing before transmission. The former provides richer information but can cause data loss and high-power consumption due to the large volume of transmission. On the other hand, the latter reduces data loss and saves power, but can provide less information.

Abstract Objectives This study validated the Japanese version of the Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder‐Rating Scale‐5 (ADHD‐RS‐5) and the Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale. We extended the ADHD‐RS‐5 by adding the oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder subscales to compare the two rating scales psychometrically. Methods We examined the internal consistency, test‐retest reliability, construct validity and criterion validity of the two rating scales in 135 Japanese outpatients aged 6–18 years. Results The internal consistency and test‐retest reliability were good for all the subscales of the two rating scales except for the conduct disorder subscale of the ADHD‐RS‐5 extended. Good construct validity was revealed by expected correlational patterns between subscales from the two rating scales and the Children Behavior Checklist. The criterion validity was good for all the subscales of the two rating scales rated by parents, while teacher‐ratings revealed substantially lower predictive ability for all the subscales. Agreement between parent‐ and teacher‐ratings of the two rating scales was generally moderate and using predictive ratings alone of both ratings showed the best predictive ability among the integration methods examined. Conclusion The two rating scales have sound psychometric properties and will aid in screening and severity assessment of externalizing disorders in Japanese clinical settings.

Abstract Objective The Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School‐Age Children‐Present and Lifetime version (K‐SADS‐PL) is a widely used semi‐structured diagnostic interview in child and adolescent psychiatry. However, the psychometric properties of its updated version, the K‐SADS‐PL for DSM‐5, have scarcely been examined, especially for criterion validity. This study was designed to examine the inter‐rater reliability, criterion validity and construct validity of the K‐SADS‐PL for DSM‐5 in 137 Japanese outpatients. Methods Two of 12 experienced clinicians independently performed the K‐SADS interview for each patient in a conjoint session, and the resulting consensus diagnosis was compared with a “best‐estimate” diagnosis made by two of eight experienced clinicians using all available information for the patient. Results The inter‐rater reliability was excellent, as shown by κ > 0.75 for all disorders, with the exception of current separation anxiety disorder. The criterion validity was fair to good, as shown by κ > 0.40 for all disorders, with the exception of current and lifetime agoraphobia. The construct validity was also good, as shown by theoretically expected associations between the K‐SADS‐PL diagnoses and subscales of the child behavior checklist. Conclusion The K‐SADS‐PL for DSM‐5, now available in Japanese, generates valid diagnoses in child and adolescent psychiatry.