Vibration-based damage detection techniques used for health monitoring of structures: a review

  • Swagato Das
  • P. Saha
  • S. K. Patro
Original Paper


Structural health monitoring (SHM) techniques have been studied for several years. An effective approach for SHM is to choose the parameters that are sensitive to the damage occurring in the structure but not sensitive to operational or environmental damages. This paper deals with a comparative study among the different vibration-based damage detection methods: fundamental modal examination, local diagnostic method, non-probabilistic methodology and the time series method. All these strategies contemplate different parameters of a structure to recognize damage. Out of the study made, time series analysis proves to more successfully in damage identification than the rest of the methods.


Damage detection Modal analysis Local diagnostic method Non-parametric analysis Times series analysis Ambient vibration 


  1. 1.
    Xu YL, Chen B (2008) Integrated vibration control and health monitoring of building structures using semi-active friction dampers: Part I—methodology. Eng Struct 30:1789–1801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khoshnoudian F, Esfandiari A (2011) Structural damage diagnosis using modal data. Sharif Univ Technol. 18:853–860Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dessi D, Camerlengo G (2015) Damage identification techniques via modal curvature analysis: overview and comparison. Mech Syst Signal Process 52–53:181–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Modares M, Waksmanshi N (2013) Overview of structural health monitoring for steel bridges. Am Soc Civil Eng. 18:187–191Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jiang X, Mahadevan S (2008) Bayesian Probabilistic Inference for Nonparametric Damage Detection of Structures. J Eng Mech 134(10):820–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nakamura M, Masri SF, Chassiakos AG, Caughey TK (1998) A method for non-parametric damage detection through the use of neural networks. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 27(9):997–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fang X, Luo H, Tang J (2005) Structural damage detection using neural network with learning rate improvement. Comput Struct 83(25–26):2150–2161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chatfield C (ed) (2004) The analysis of time series: an introduction, 6th edn, Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elkordy MF, Chang KC, Lee GC (1993) Neural networks trained by analytically simulated damage states. J Comput Civil Eng 7(2):130–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barroso LR, Rodriguez R (2004) Damage detection utilizing the damage index method to a benchmark structure. J Eng Mech. 130(2):142–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Doebling SW, Farrar CR, Prime MB (1998) A summary review of vibration-based damage identification methods. Shock Vib Digest. 30(2):91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang NE, Shen Z, Long SR, Wu MC, Shih HH, Zheng Q, Yen N-C, Tung CC, Liu HH (1998) The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non-stationary time series analysis. In: The Royal Society of LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pines D, Salvino L (2006) Structural health monitoring using empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert phase. J Sound Vib 294:97–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu L, Lin JC (2015) Cloud computing based time series analysis for structural damage detection. J Eng MechGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Whalen TM (2008) The behavior of higher order mode shape derivatives in damaged, beam-like structures. J Sound Vib 309:426–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    West WM (1986) Illustration of the use of modal assurance criterion to detect structural changes in an orbiter test specimen. In: The Fourth International Modal Analysis Conference. Los Angeles, CAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yuen MMF (1985) A numerical study of the eigen parameters of a damaged cantilever. J Sound Vib 103:301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pandey AK, Biswas M, Samman MM (1991) Damage detection from changes in curvature mode shapes. J Sound Vib 145:321–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cawley P, Adams RD (1979) The location of defects in structures from measurements of natural frequencies. J Strain Anal. 14(2):49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stubbs N, Kim JT, Topole K (1992) An efficient and robust algorithm for damage localization in offshore platforms. In: The ASCE Tenth Structures Congress. San Antonio, TXGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Law SS, Waldron P, Taylor C (1992) Damage detection of a reinforced concrete bridge deck using the frequency response function. In: The 10th International Modal Analysis Conference. San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yu L, Zhu JH, Yu LL (2013) Structural damage detection in a truss bridge model using fuzzy clustering and measured FRF data reducing by principal component projection. Adv Struct Eng. 16(1):207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Safak E (1997) New directions in seismic monitoring of multi-story buildings. In: Chang F-K (ed) Structural health monitoring, current status and perspective. Technomic Publishing, Lancaster, pp 418–430Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Modena C, Sonda D, Zonta D (1999) Damage localization in reinforced concrete structures by using damping measurements, damage assessment of structures. The International Conference on Damage Assessment of Structures (DAMAS ‘99). Dublin, Ireland, pp 132–141Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sohn H, Farrar CR (2000) Statistical process control and projection techniques for damage detection. In: European COST F3 Conference on System Identification and Structural Health Monitoring. Madrid, SpainGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen LJ, Yu L (2013) Structural nonlinear damage identification algorithm based on time series ARMA/GARCH model. Adv Struct Eng 16(9):1597–1609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Choudhury AR (1996) Damage detection in structures using measured frequency response function data. In: Department of Mechanical Engineering. 1996, Victoria University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adams DE (2007) Health monitoring of structural materials and components. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Abdalla M, Grigoriadis KM, Zimmerman DC (1998) Enhanced damaged detection using linear matrix inequalities. In: 16th International Modal Analysis Conference, Santa Barbara, CAGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hwang HY, Kim C (2004) Damage detection in structures using a few frequency response measurements. J Sound Vib 270:1–14MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fugate ML, Sohn H, Farrar CR (2001) Vibration-based damage detection using statistical process control. Mech Syst Signal Process 16(4):707–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Su WC, Huang CS, Hung SL, Chen LJ, Lin WJ (2012) Locating damaged storeys in a shear building based on its sub-structural natural frequencies. Eng Struct 39:126–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Huang Q, Xu YL, Li JC, Su ZQ, Liu HJ (2012) Structural damage detection of controlled building structures using frequency response functions. J Sound Vib 331:3476–3492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ewins DJ (1984) Modal testing: theory and practice. In: Research Studies Press, Letchworth, Hertfordshire, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Salawu OS (1997) Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Eng Struct 19(9):718–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen B, Xu YL (2008) Integrated vibration control and health monitoring of building structures using semi-active friction dampers : Part II—Numerical investigation. Eng Struct 30(3):573–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    da Silva S, Dias JM, Lopes JV, Brennan MJ (2008) Structural damage detection by fuzzy clustering. Mech Syst Signal Process. 22(7):1636–1649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Askegaard V, Mossing P (1988) Long-term observation of RC-bridge using changes in natural frequencies. Nordic Concr Res. 7:20–27Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yu L, Zhu JH (2015) Nonlinear damage detection using higher statistical moments of structural responses. Struct Eng Mech. 54(2):221–237MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Figueriedo E, Park G, Figuerias J, Farrar C, Worden K (2009) Structural health monitoring algorithm comparisons using standard data sets. Rep. LA-14393, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NMGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chen J, Garba JA (1988) On-orbit damage assessment for large space structures. AIAA J. 26(9):1119–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Li H, Hyang Y, Ou J, Bao Y (2011) Fractal dimension based damage detection method for beams with a uniform cross-section. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng. 26(3):190–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wang J, Qiao P (2007) Improved damage detection of beam type structures using uniform load surface. Struct Health Monit. 6(2):99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhu H, Li L, He XQ (2011) Damage detection method for shear buildings using the changes in the first mode shape slopes. Comput Struct 89:733–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Roy K, Chaudhuri SR (2013) Fundamental mode shape and its derivatives in structural damage localization. J Sound Vib 332:5584–5593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Fan W, Qiao P (2011) Vibration-based damage identification methods : a review and comparative study. Struct Health Monit. 10(1):83–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang S (2013) Damage detection in offshore platform structures from limited modal data. Appl Ocean Res 41:48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Shi ZY, Law SS, Zhang LM (1998) Structural damage localization from Modal strain energy change. J Sound Vib 218(5):825–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Alvandi A, Cremona C (2005) Assessment of vibration-based damage identification techniques. J Sound Vib 292:179–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stubbs N, Kim JT, Farrar CR (1995) Field verification of a non-destructive damage localization and severity estimation algorithm. In: Proceedings of 13th international modal analysis conference 1995Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cornwell P (1999) Application of the strain energy damage detection method to plate-like structures. J Sound Vib 224(2):359–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Dawari VB, Kamble PP, Vesmawala GR (2015) Structural damage identification using modal strain energy method. Adv Struct Eng. 3:2599–2607Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Shih HW, Thambiratnam DP, Chan THT (2009) Vibration based structural damage detection in flexural members using multi-criteria approach. J Sound Vib 323:645–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Park S, Kim YB, Stubbs N (2002) Nondestructive damage detection in large structures via vibration monitoring. Electron J Struct Eng. 2:359–374Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Radzien´ski M, Krawczuk M, Palacz M (2011) Improvement of damage detection methods based on experimental modal parameters. Mech Syst Signal Process 25:2169–2190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fukunaga H, Hu N, Chang FK (2002) Structural damage identification using piezoelectric sensors. Int J Solids Struct 39:393–418CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Okafor AC, Chandrashekhara K, Jiang YP (1996) Delamination prediction in composite beams with built-in piezoelectric devices using modal analysis and neural network. Smart Mater Struct 5:338–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tseng KKH, Naidu ASK (2002) Non-parametric damage detection and characterization using smart piezoceramic material. Smart Mater Struct 11(3):317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Oppenheim AV, Schafer RW (eds) (1989) Discrete-time signal processing. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Altunok E, Taha MMR, Ross TJ (2007) Possibilistic approach for damage detection in structural health monitoring. J Struct Eng 133(9):1247–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sohn H, Law KH (1997) A Bayesian probabilistic approach for structure damage detection. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 26(12):1259–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Katafygiotis LS, Lam HF, Mickleborough N (2004) Application of a statistical model updating approach on phase I of the IASC–ASCE structural health monitoring benchmark study. J Eng Mech. 130(1):34–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Beck JL, Katafygiotis LS (1998) Updating models and their uncertainties. Part 1: Bayesian statistical framework. J Eng Mech. 124(4):455–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Beck JL, Au SK, Vanik M (2001) Monitoring structural health using a probabilistic measure. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng. 16(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Beck JL, Yuen KV (2004) Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. J Eng Mech. 130(2):192–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sohn H, Law KH (2000) Bayesian probabilistic damage detection of a reinforced-concrete bridge column. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 29:1131–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Jeffrey H (ed) (1961) Theory of probability, ed. r. Edition. Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dyke SJ, Bernal D, Beck JL, Ventura C (2001) An Experimental benchmark problem in structural health monitoring. In: Third International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ching J, Beck JL (2004) Bayesian analysis of the phase II IASC–ASCE structural health monitoring experimental benchmark data. J Eng Mech. 130(10):1233–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Bao C, Hao H, Li ZX (2013) Integrated ARMA model method for damage detection of subsea pipeline system. Eng Struct 48:176–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Carden EP, Brownjohn JMW (2008) ARMA modelled time-series classification for structural health monitoring of civil Infrastructures. 2:295–314Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Garcia GV, Osegueda R (1999) Damage detection using ARMA model coefficients. In: SPIE, The International Society for Optical EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Pandit SM, Wu SM (eds) (1983) Time series and system analysis with applications. Wiley, NewYorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mosavi AA, Dickey D, Seracino R, Rizkalla S (2012) Identifying damage locations under ambient vibrations utilizing vector autoregressive models and Mahalanobis distances. Mech Syst Signal Process 26:254–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Mahalanobis PC (1936) On the generalised distance in statistics. In: The National Institute of Sciences of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Bishop CM (1995) Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Fassois SD, Sakellariou JS (2007) Time series methods for fault detection and identification in vibrating structures. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci. 365:411–448MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kopsaftopoulos FP, Fassois SD (2010) Vibration based health monitoring for a lightweight truss structure: experimental assessment of several statistical time series methods. Mech Syst Signal Process 24:1977–1997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    de Lautour OR, Omenzetter P (2010) Damage classification and estimation in experimental structures using time series analysis and pattern recognition. Mech Syst Signal Process 24(5):1556–1569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Trendafilova I, Manoach E (2008) Vibration-based damage detection in plates by using time series analysis. Mech Syst Signal Process 22:1092–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kopsaftopoulos FP, Fassois SD (2013) A functional model based statistical time series method for vibration based damage detection, localization, and magnitude estimation. Mech Syst Signal Process 39:143–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Balmes E, Wright JR. (1997) Garteur group on ground vibration testing—results from the test of a single structure by 12 laboratories in Europe. In: Proceedings of ASME Design EngineeringTechnical Conferences, Sacramento, USAGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Chen K, Zheng WM (2009) Cloud computing: system instances and current research. J. Software. 20(5):1337–1348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Box G, Jenkins G (1976) Time series analysis: forecasting and control. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Gul M, Catbas FN (2011) Structural health monitoring and damage assessment using a novel time series analysis methodology with sensor clustering. J Sound Vib 330(6):1196–1210CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringSRES College of EngineeringKopargaonIndia
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringKIIT UniversityBhubaneswarIndia
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringVeer Surendra Sai University of TechnologySambalpurIndia

Personalised recommendations