Figure 1:

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

Figure 4:

Figure 5:
![Decomposition process of a signal using DWT [13]. DWT, discrete wavelet transform.](https://sciendo-parsed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/678caf4e082aa65dea3d247b/j_ijssis-2025-0044_fig_005.jpg?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIA6AP2G7AKAZCYREJI%2F20260226%2Feu-central-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20260226T040506Z&X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEFEaDGV1LWNlbnRyYWwtMSJGMEQCIAF7Dgndd8sS17gb%2BHeSNPDsrEenquIRO8c7SGWN%2FQo0AiA9dq7CUiFMuV91ym8CsByhjMBRIdfibA0JKw1Koejj5Cq8BQgaEAIaDDk2MzEzNDI4OTk0MCIMwog5QGd6ljGffDsjKpkFzOorUzY49NuSL76iYohyDLhbUd89ubTbvOTW%2BaeMkbKHfsr5MLJRqdY8UjMIVA6FUhMKinGaG6WJEm%2Bd%2BpJSBcXR8E7ftBR5gi6tYDOffbNssSwktOPLyUOVYYeUx8ojWZXEHfGjUVAjlQtCT4sCYUMkmtAjIMVGYDPXLH6P7rjlt5VAeBeTFAkkEUDy6TBWkpBKFq%2Bsdt8i%2BthQ%2BFlYvOc9rZsB0jmO9kgpoknByRD2EgG%2BV2to8vCfX9zr4oQ9x5BC2yS47hwe9xmofslHyI2bXrdVOWKY4Dk0UOpD5jNg3zoHwk64TBe%2B9yjMKrgrmzbVKnx9VrTE%2FfANj%2FAzMEsLAe7dXInwzpCVvOs2f2kBcOgfBwljCNslPkhbv7U7gXQcJKc4E%2BGj8gJYInB%2Bkv2DsP4aCbGJmFKVFnQ54DcdcWAfJb0QrkBwL%2F4WFiVqPUgCZ%2BfyMVAyyubFiAcnAab9LtR4ui%2Fc1QmzGt0I5PKtUicC1vun4q0Rfm%2F15iKIORV1AxGS0OpORI1tt7lUyiWSONNHxc%2BQ4FF6RDRS88o9r3igmohW63HFoszoLYHRt2Cn7Pavl3kVozJ8af%2BB1E7ViHq%2FBWXKF6fG028VQGzRmzldekh9drQyqMB653YnivqFMaV4ymPSyDscm%2F9aHmNEL9xXUh%2BEtaowOJVbMxM8fpWfcgXnE9ObnPSlHyFD2EykqjBAj7FjADcF%2FwkzWRCy6ggT%2FF1%2FuJaT4%2FRQABQtIKKeNERp7pPyQX8pxJhMB%2BVWnRl3caBrlfbYvHCYpK66ZjTSAjTwyh7lYmiYo2l3p%2FcKnpdQJEJnoGPgwEYKzu3ZONTwaCLrnBOR3hjB3PPct7ndUs0AOm9TsZ3rN1OwAUj1kJq6bpAwlKf%2BzAY6sgFNlJda3k05S6vxs1rspNnQELYvazVliyingPj5xQORN70B3jLMKqgibeFrqHtVJ0R4W2yRIzJfQVg%2Fyx9h78lW2F1HZUH7oBJnHSdlVwRIAFSWIW8UV4LmrokGjxRO%2FhwCrAt7XaMCpW2QMZ3N3DOBRhu8wANig1b6r%2BBWOdfAUfWLtdeuY5gZLYO577T5if2r9WMzySSJCL8jOemHG7ed7KPCuYAYjxCPoH6BcjXzXoN6&X-Amz-Signature=d5b4eb1e0683ada643e1a84c58713300d3983324a10c914c68f4895513c5ccd7&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&x-amz-checksum-mode=ENABLED&x-id=GetObject)
Figure 6:

Figure 7:

Figure 7:

Figure 7:

Figure 8:

Figure 10:

Average estimated error value of SS specimen sheet_
| SNR input signal (dB) | db4 | coif4 | sym3 | bior2.2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | 8.2710 | 13.3138 | 5.2091 | 6.6665 |
Different wavelet estimated frequency and average error for specimen sheets of SS and copper with dimensions 220 mm × 220 mm × 1_3 mm and 220 mm × 220 mm × 1 mm using 200 g ball
| Name of wavelet family | SS specimen plate | Copper specimen plate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | |
| Daubechies wavelets | 144.19 | 151.7 | 107.04 | 97.80 |
| Coiflet wavelet | 146.10 | 105.7 | ||
| Symlets wavelet | 156.6 | 81.41 | ||
| BiorSplines wavelet | 156.8 | 117.6 | ||
Elastic constant for SS specimen sheet_
| Sr no. | SS specimen plate | Copper specwimen plate | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Height of impact in cm | Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | Error (%) | Average error (%) | Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | Error (%) | Average error (%) | |
| 1 | 50 | 144.19 | 146.60 | 1.64 | 1.30% | 107.04 | 105.7 | 1.26 | 1.18% |
| 2 | 70 | 146.02 | 1.25 | 105.8 | 1.17 | ||||
| 3 | 90 | 146.80 | 1.77 | 105.6 | 1.36 | ||||
| 4 | 110 | 145.60 | 0.96 | 105.4 | 1.55 | ||||
| 5 | 130 | 145.80 | 1.10 | 106.2 | 0.80 | ||||
| 6 | 150 | 145.80 | 1.10 | 106.0 | 0.98 | ||||
| Average frequency and error | 146.10 | 1.30 | 105.78 | 1.18 | |||||
Average estimated error value of copper specimen sheet_
| Sr. no. | SS specimen plate | Copper specimen plate | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Height of impact in cm | Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | Error (%) | Average error (%) | Frequency obtained by FEM (ANSYS software) | Estimated frequency using proposed method | Error (%) | Average error (%) | |
| 1 | 50 | 144.19 | 146.60 | 1.64 | 1.30% | 107.04 | 105.7 | 1.26 | 1.18% |
| 2 | 70 | 146.02 | 1.25 | 105.8 | 1.17 | ||||
| 3 | 90 | 146.80 | 1.77 | 105.6 | 1.36 | ||||
| 4 | 110 | 145.60 | 0.96 | 105.4 | 1.55 | ||||
| 5 | 130 | 145.80 | 1.10 | 106.2 | 0.80 | ||||
| 6 | 150 | 145.80 | 1.10 | 106.0 | 0.98 | ||||
| Average frequency and error | 146.10 | 1.30 | 105.78 | 1.18 | |||||
The calculated error copper and SS plate frequency
| SS plate size of 220 mm × 220 mm × 1.3 mm | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Fundamental frequency (Hz) | Young’s modules (N/m2) | Stiffness (N/m2) |
| FEM by ANSYS | 144.19 | 187.69 | 17.06 |
| Multiresolution method | 146.10 | 191.39 | 17.20 |
| Average error (%) | 1.30 | 1.97 | 0.14 |
Elastic constant for copper specimen sheet
| Copper plate size of 220 mm × 220 mm × 1 mm | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Fundamental frequency (Hz) | Young’s modules (N/m2) | Stiffness (N/m2) |
| FEM by ANSYS | 107.04 | 133.82 | 12.55 |
| Multiresolution method | 105.78 | 129.49 | 12.34 |
| Average error (%) | 1.19 | 2.33 | 0.21 |