Skip to main content
Log in

Crack Identification of Steel Bar Based on Sensor Optimal Placement

  • Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed
  • Published:
Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The traditional modal test of steel bars has two chief disadvantages of being time-consuming and having a complex detection operation. This paper presents the effective independence driving-point residue (EI-DPR) method for sensor optimal placement, which identifies cracks of steel bars based on the modal assurance criterion (MAC) and minimum mean square error (MMSE) criterion. The steel bars with cracks are tested separately by the uniform measuring point method and the optimal sensor placement method according to the vibration modal test. By comparing the test results, the optimal sensor placement method can identify cracks rapidly and accurately, which is more efficient than the uniform measuring point method. The study provides a reference for the rapid non-destructive testing of large-aspect ratio steel bars.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. S. Zhong, S.O. Oyadiji, Identification of cracks in beams with auxiliary mass spatial probing by stationary wavelet transform. J. Vib. Acoust. Trans. ASME 130(0410014), 041001-1–041001-14 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. B. Li, D. Li, X. Zhao, J. Ou, Optimal sensor placement in health monitoring of suspension bridge. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 55(7), 2039–2047 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A.R.M. Rao, G. Anandakumar, Optimal placement of sensors for structural system identification and health monitoring using a hybrid swarm intelligence technique. Smart Mater. Struct. 16(6), 2658–2672 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. T.-H. Yi, H.-N. Li, M. Gu, Optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring based on multiple optimization strategies. Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 20(7), 881–900 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. S. Li, X. Cheng, Y. Chen, H. Zhang, The optimal placement of sensors in square target regions with varying boundary length. Procedia Eng 62, 899–906 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. C.B. Larson, D.C. Zimmerman, E.L. Marek, A comparison of modal test planning techniques—excitation and sensor placement using the NASA 8-bay truss. Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. (SPIE) 2251, 205–211 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Y. Ling, X. Xu, L. Shen, J. Liu, Multi sensor data fusion method based on fuzzy neural network, in IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics INDIN (2008), pp. 153–158

  8. R. Kumar, M. Wolenetz, B. Agarwalla, J.S. Shin, P. Hutto, A. Paul, U. Ramachandran, DFuse: a framework for distributed data fusion, in International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (2003), pp 114–125

  9. Z.N. Li, J. Tang, Q.S. Li, Optimal sensor locations for structural vibration measurements. Appl. Acoust. 65(8), 807–818 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. H.B. Kim, Y.S. Park, Sensor placement guide for structural joint stiffness model improvement. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 11(5), 651–672 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Q. Xie, S. Xue, A hybrid algorithm for optimal sensor placement of structural health monitoring. J. Tongji Univ. Nat. Sci. 34(6), 726–731 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. D.S. Li, H.N. Li, C.P. Fritzen, The connection between effective independence and modal kinetic energy methods for sensor placement. J. Sound Vib. 305(4–5), 945–955 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. D.C. Kammer, M.L. Tinker, Optimal placement of triaxial accelerometers for modal vibration tests. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 18(1), 29–41 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. D.C. Kammer, Optimal sensor placement for modal identification using system-realization methods. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 19(3), 729–731 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. F.Z. Tajrishi, G. Roshan, A.R. Mirza, Optimal sensor placement for modal identification of a strap-braced cold formed steel frame based on improved genetic algorithm. Int. J. Optim. Civil Eng. 4(1), 93–119 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Pastor, M. Binda, T.H. Arik, Modal assurance criterion. Procedia Eng. 48(1), 543–548 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. M. Guo, B. Li, J. Yang, S. Liang, Study of experimental modal analysis method of machine tool spindle system. J. Vibroeng. 17(6), 3173–3186 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Meo, G. Zumpano, On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure. Eng. Struct. 27(10), 1488–1497 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51335003).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lina Wang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, L., Li, R., Liu, L. et al. Crack Identification of Steel Bar Based on Sensor Optimal Placement. J Fail. Anal. and Preven. 19, 866–873 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-019-00674-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-019-00674-2

Keywords

Navigation