Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 37–51 | Cite as

Structural model updating using sensitivity of wavelet transform coefficients of incomplete structural response

  • A. Shojaei Mansourabadi
  • A. EsfandiariEmail author
Original Paper


In this paper, a structural model updating technique is presented based on the wavelet analysis of the structural responses. The sensitivity of the wavelet coefficients of the dynamic response with respect to the structural parameters is evaluated using the incomplete measured responses. To achieve an accurate sensitivity equation, measured data are incorporated in mathematical formulation. The least-square algorithm with the appropriate weighting algorithm is used for solving the over-determined system of equations. The proposed method is applied numerically to the simulated data of a 2D truss model and a 3D frame model. The results show the great promise of the wavelet transform via the proposed sensitivity-based approach for structural model updating and damage detection.


Model updating Damage detection Sensitivity equation Wavelet transform Optimization 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

13349_2018_316_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 14 kb)


  1. 1.
    Meola C, Carlomagno GM, Giorleo L (2004) Geometrical limitations to detection of defects in composites by means of infrared thermography. J Nondestr Eval 23(4):125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaphle MR et al (2011) Use of acoustic emission technique for structural health monitoring of bridges. Structural Health Monitoring in Australia. Nova Science Publishing, Hauppauge, pp 55–80Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crivelli D, Bland S (2016) Structural health monitoring via acoustic emission. Reinf Plast 60(6):390–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dizaji MS, Alipour M, Harris D (2018) Leveraging full-field measurement from 3D digital image correlation for structural identification. Exp Mech 58(7):1049–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dizaji MS, Alipour M, Harris DK (2017) Leveraging vision for structural identification: a digital image correlation based approach. International digital imaging correlation society. Springer, Berlin, pp 121–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Michaels JE (2008) Ultrasonic structural health monitoring: strategies, issues, and progress. In: Smart Sensor Phenomena, Technology, Networks, and Systems 2008. International Society for Optics and PhotonicsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Imregun M (1991) A review of model updating. Tech Shock Vibration Digest 23(1):9–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Das S, Saha P, Patro S (2016) Vibration-based damage detection techniques used for health monitoring of structures: a review. J Civil Struct Health Monit 6(3):477–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fan W, Qiao P (2011) Vibration-based damage identification methods: a review and comparative study. Struct Health Monit 10(1):83–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boscato G et al (2015) Global sensitivity-based model updating for heritage structures. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 30(8):620–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maia N et al (2003) Damage detection in structures: from mode shape to frequency response function methods. Mech Syst Signal Process 17(3):489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang Y, Chen Y (2010) Direct versus iterative model updating methods for mass and stiffness matrices. Int J Struct Stab Dyn 10(02):165–186MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Esfandiari A, Bakhtiari-Nejad F, Rahai A (2013) Theoretical and experimental structural damage diagnosis method using natural frequencies through an improved sensitivity equation. Int J Mech Sci 70:79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Min C-H et al (2014) Sensitivity-based finite element model updating with natural frequencies and zero frequencies for damped beam structures. Int J Naval Archit Ocean Eng 6(4):904–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kourehli SS (2015) Damage assessment in structures using incomplete modal data and artificial neural network. Int J Struct Stab Dyn 15(06):1450087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hosseini M, Khoshnoudian F, Esfandiari A (2017) Improved data expansion method used in damage detection method. J Civil Struct Health Monit 7(1):15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang X, Sim S, Spencer B Jr. (2008) Finite element model updating of a truss model using incomplete modal data. In: Proceedings of World Forum on smart materials and smart structures technologyGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Limongelli MP (2015) An experimental evaluation of the reliability of a damage localization algorithm based on FRF interpolation. J Civil Struct Health Monit 5(4):427–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Esfandiari A (2014) Structural model updating using incomplete transfer function of strain data. J Sound Vib 333(16):3657–3670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghafory-Ashtiany M, Ghasemi M (2013) System identification method by using inverse solution of equations of motion in frequency domain. J Vib Control 19(11):1633–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hu X, Shenton HW III (2006) Damage identification based on dead load redistribution: effect of measurement error. J Struct Eng 132(8):1264–1273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhu J et al (2015) A two-step approach for structural damage localization and quantification using static and dynamic response data. Adv Struct Eng 18(9):1415–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Amini Tehrani H, Bakhshi A, Akhavat M (2017) An effective approach for structural damage localization in flexural members based on generalized S-transform. Sci Iran. Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sun Z, Chang C (2002) Structural damage assessment based on wavelet packet transform. J Struct Eng 128(10):1354–1361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marwala T (2002) Finite element model updating using wavelet data and genetic algorithm. J Aircr 39(4):709–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xu D et al (2016) A comparison of common model updating approaches. dynamics of coupled structures, vol 4. Springer, Berlin, pp 439–446Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lu C-J, Hsu Y-T (2000) Application of wavelet transform to structural damage detection. Shock Vibration Digest 32(1):50Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hou Z, Noori M, Amand RS (2000) Wavelet-based approach for structural damage detection. J Eng Mech 126(7):677–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang Q, Deng X (1999) Damage detection with spatial wavelets. Int J Solids Struct 36(23):3443–3468CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gentile A, Messina A (2003) On the continuous wavelet transforms applied to discrete vibrational data for detecting open cracks in damaged beams. Int J Solids Struct 40(2):295–315CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ding Y, Li A (2007) Structural health monitoring of long-span suspension bridges using wavelet packet analysis. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 6(3):289–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ghanem R, Romeo F (2000) A wavelet-based approach for the identification of linear time-varying dynamical systems. J Sound Vib 234(4):555–576CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Quek S et al (2001) Practical issues in the detection of damage in beams using wavelets. Smart Mater Struct 10(5):1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lu Z, Law S (2007) Features of dynamic response sensitivity and its application in damage detection. J Sound Vib 303(1):305–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lu C-J, Hsu Y-T (2002) Vibration analysis of an inhomogeneous string for damage detection by wavelet transform. Int J Mech Sci 44(4):745–754CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shahsavari V, Chouinard L, Bastien J (2017) Wavelet-based analysis of mode shapes for statistical detection and localization of damage in beams using likelihood ratio test. Eng Struct 132:494–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shahsavari V et al (2017) Likelihood-based testing of wavelet coefficients for damage detection in beam structures. J Civil Struct Health Monit 7(1):79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Abbasnia R, Mirzaei B, Yousefbeik S (2016) A two-step method composed of wavelet transform and model updating method for multiple damage diagnosis in beams. J Vibroeng 18(3):1497–1513. Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang W, Sun L, Zhang L (2018) Local damage identification method using finite element model updating based on a new wavelet damage function. Adv Struct Eng 21(10):1482–1494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Law S, Li X, Lu Z (2006) Structural damage detection from wavelet coefficient sensitivity with model errors. J Eng Mech 132(10):1077–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mottershead JE, Link M, Friswell MI (2011) The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: a tutorial. Mech Syst Signal Process 25(7):2275–2296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lin R, Lim M, Ong J (1993) Improving finite element models in the higher frequency range using modified frequency response function sensitivity method. Finite Elem Anal Des 15(2):157–175CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Esfandiari A, Vahedi M (2018) Enhanced sensitivity for structural damage detection using incomplete modal data. Int J Struct Stab Dyn 18(04):1850054MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Entezami A, Shariatmadar H (2014) Damage detection in structural systems by improved sensitivity of modal strain energy and Tikhonov regularization method. Int J Dyn Control 2(4):509–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lee JS, Choi I-Y, Cho H-N (2004) Modeling and detection of damage using smeared crack model. Eng Struct 26(2):267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sanayei M et al (2012) Quasi-linear sensitivity-based structural model updating using experimental transfer functions. Struct Health Monit 11(6):656–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bakhtiari-Nejad F, Rahai A, Esfandiari A (2005) A structural damage detection method using static noisy data. Eng Struct 27(12):1784–1793CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.Faculty of Maritime EngineeringAmirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations