Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 58, Issue 4, pp 701–711 | Cite as

Damage identification method of girder bridges based on finite element model updating and modal strain energy

  • Jie Niu
  • ZhouHong Zong
  • FuPeng Chu


A timely and accurate damage identification for bridge structures is essential to prevent sudden failures/collapses and other catastrophic accidents. Based on response surface model (RSM) updating and element modal strain energy (EMSE) damage index, this paper proposes a novel damage identification method for girder bridge structures. The effectiveness of the proposed damage identification method is investigated using experiments on four simply supported steel beams. With Xiabaishi Bridge, a prestressed continuous rigid frame bridge with large span, as the engineering background, the proposed damage identification method is validated by using numerical simulation to generate different bearing damage scenarios. Finally, the efficiency of the method is justified by considering its application to identifying cracking damage for a real continuous beam bridge called Xinyihe Bridge. It is concluded that the EMSE damage index is sensitive to the cracking damage and the bearing damage. The locations and levels of multiple cracking damages and bearing damages can be also identified. The results illuminate a great potential of the proposed method in identifying damages of real bridge structures.


damage identification response surface model finite element model updating element modal strain energy damage index girder bridge 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Friswell M I, Mottershead J E. Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 1995zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weng J H, Loh C H, Yang J N. Experimental study of damage detection by data-driven subspace identification and finite-element model updating. J Struc Eng, ASCE, 2009, 135: 1533–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reynders E, Teughels A, Roeck G D. Finite element model updating and structural damage identification using OMAX data. Mech Sys Signal Process, 2010, 24: 1306–1323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zong Z H, Ren W X. Finite Element Model Updating and Model Validation of Bridge Structures (in Chinese). Beijing: China Communication Press, 2012Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lei Y, Jiang Y Q, Xu Z Q. Structural damage detection with limited input and output measurement signals. Mech Sys Signal Process, 2012, 28: 229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaneva S, Weberb F, Verhaegena M. Experimental validation of a finite-element model updating procedure. J Sound Vibr, 2007, 300: 394–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weber B, Paultre P. Damage identification in a truss tower by regularized model updating. J Struc Eng, ASCE, 2010, 136: 307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farrar C R, Worden K. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos T R Soc A, 2007, 365: 303–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farrar C R, Lieven N. Damage prognosis: The future of structural health monitoring. Philos T R Soc A, 2007, 365: 623–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lei Y, Wang H F, Shen W A. Update the finite element model of Canton Tower based on direct matrix updating with incomplete modal data. Smart Struc Sys, 2012, 10: 471–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Doebling S W, Hemez F M, Peterson L D, et al. Improved damage location accuracy using strain energy-based on mode selection criteria. AIAA J, 1997, 35: 693–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stubbs N, Kim J T. Damage localization in structures without baseline modal parameters. AIAA J, 1996, 34: 1644–1649CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shi Z Y, Law S S, Zhang L M. Structural damage detection from modal strain energy change. J Eng Mech, ASCE, 2000, 126: 1216–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heam G, Testa R B. Modal analysis for damage detection in structures. J Struc Eng, ASCE, 1991, 117: 3042–3063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jaishi B. Finite element model updating of civil engineering structures under operational conditions. Dissertation for the Doctor Degree. Fuzhou: Fuzhou University, 2005Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Box G E P, Wilson K B. On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions. J R Stat Soc B, 1951, 13: 1–45zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cundy A L. Use of response surface meta-models in damage identification of dynamic structures. Dissertation for the Master Degree. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2003Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ren W X, Chen H B. Finite element model updating in structural dynamics by using response-surface method. Eng Struc, 2010, 32: 2455–2465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ren W X, Fang S E, Deng M Y. Response surface based finite element model updating using structural static response. J Eng Mech, ASCE, 2011, 137: 248–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fang S E, Perera R. Damage identification by response surface based model updating using D-optimal design. Mech Sys Signal Process, 2011, 25: 717–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zong Z H, Gao M L, Xia Z H. Finite element model validation of the continuous rigid frame bridge based on structural health monitoring Part 1: FE model updating based on the response surface method (in Chinese). China Civil Eng J, 2011, 44: 90–98Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yan W J, Ren W X. A direct algebraic method to calculate the sensitivity of element modal strain energy. Int J Numer Methods in Biomed Eng, 2009, 27: 694–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Myers R H, Montgomery D C. Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dall’Asta A, Dezi L. Discussion about: Prestress force effect on vibration frequency of concrete bridges. J Struc Eng, ASCE, 1996, 122: 446–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zong Z H. Design and study of structural health monitoring system of Xiabaishi Bridge (in Chinese). J China Railway Soc, 2009, 30: 65–71MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lin X S. FE model validation of bridge based on high order response surface method (in Chinese). Dissertation for the Master Degree. Fuzhou: Fuzhou University, 2008Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Vibration Engineering Section, College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical SciencesUniversity of ExeterExeterUK
  3. 3.Fujian Academy of Building ResearchFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations