Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal sensor placement in the lightweight steel framing structures using the novel TTFD approach subjected to near-fault earthquakes

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lightweight steel framing (LSF) system has been proposed as an economic system and earthquake resistant. In this study, a LSF structure was modeled using finite element method, which the material properties were defined according to laboratory data. Then, the modal and nonlinear time-history analyses were undertaken using the seismic scaled records of near-fault earthquakes. Moreover, three optimal sensor placement (OSP) methods were utilized, and genetic algorithm was selected to act as the solution of the optimization formulation in the selection of the best sensor placement according to structural dynamic response of LSF system. A novel numerical approach was proposed for OSP, which was called transformed time-history to frequency domain (TTFD) algorithm. The TTFD method uses nonlinear time-history analysis results as an exact seismic response despite the common OSP algorithms utilize the eigenvalue responses. Results show that utilizing an efficient OSP method in structural health monitoring process leads to detecting the critical weak points of sensitive structures, so as to retrofit them.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Xu L, Tangorra FM (2007) Experimental investigation of lightweight residential floors supported by cold-formed steel C-shape joists. J Constr Steel Res 63(3):422–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Kharat M, Rogers CA (2007) Inelastic performance of cold-formed steel strap braced walls. J Constr Steel Res 63(4):460–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zeynalian M, Ronagh HR (2011) A numerical study on seismic characteristics of knee-braced cold formed steel shear walls. Thin Walled Struct 49(12):1517–1525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zeynalian M, Ronagh HR, Hatami S (2012) Seismic characteristics of K-braced cold-formed steel shear walls. J Constr Steel Res 77:23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baran E, Alica C (2012) Behavior of cold-formed steel wall panels under monotonic horizontal loading. J Constr Steel Res 79:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Duan H, Li S, Liu Y (2011) A nonlinear two-stage damage identification method for steel frames. Int J Adv Comput Tech 3(4):109–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen VH, Golinval JC (2010) Damage localization in linear-form structures based on sensitivity investigation for principal component analysis. J Sound Vib 329(21):4550–4566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li XY, Law SS (2010) Adaptive regularization for damage detection based on nonlinear model updating. Mech Syst Signal Process 24(6):1646–1664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Weber B, Paultre P, Proulx J (2009) Consistent regularization of nonlinear model updating for damage identification. Mech Syst Signal Process 23(6):1965–1985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yuan XD, Gao C, Gao SX (2007) A numerical simulation for influence of measurement mode quantity on structural damage identification. Eng Mech 24(1):75–78

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Jong JL, Chung BY (2006) Damage diagnosis of steel girder bridges using ambient vibration data. Eng Struct 28(6):912–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bakhary N, Hao H, Deeks AJ (2007) Damage detection using artificial neural network with consideration of uncertainties. Eng Struct 29(11):2806–2815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ajdari J (2010) Parallel Implementation of 2D Haar and Daubechies D4 transform in mesh architecture. Int J Intell Inf Process 1(2):55–64

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sadkhan SB, Abbas NA (2009) Proposed simulation of modulation identification based on wavelet transform. Int J Adv Comput Tech 1(1):78–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gao Y, Spencer JB, Ruiz SM (2006) Distributed computing strategy for structural health monitoring. Struct Cont Health Monit 13(1):488–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ji XD, Qian JR, Xu LH (2007) An experiment on localization of a two-story steel braced frame model structure. Eng Mech 24(1):62–66

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hemez FM, Farhat C (1994) An energy based optimum sensor placement criterion and its application to structure damage detection. In: Proceedings of the 12th Conference on International Modal Analysis, January 31–February 3, Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 1568–1575

  18. Miller RE (1998) Optimal sensor placement via Gaussian quadrature. Appl Math Comput 97(1):71–97

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Hiramoto K, Doki H, Obinata G (2000) Optimal sensor/actuator placement for active vibration control using explicit solution of algebraic Riccati equation. J Sound Vib 229(5):1057–1075

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Wouwer AV, Point N, Porteman S, Remy M (2000) An approach to the selection of optimal sensor locations in distributed parameter systems. J Process Cont 10(4):291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Worden K, Burrows AP (2001) Optimal sensor placement for fault detection. Eng Struct 23(8):885–901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cobb RG, Liebst BS (1997) Sensor placement and structural damage identification from minimal sensor information. AIAA J 35(2):369–374

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Shi ZY, Law SS, Zhang LM (2000) Optimum sensor placement for structural damage detection. J Eng Mech 126(11):1173–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cruz A, Vélez W, Thomson P (2010) Optimal sensor placement for modal identification of structures using genetic algorithms—a case study: the Olympic stadium in Cali, Colombia. Ann Oper Res 181(1):769–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yi TH, Li HN, Gu M (2011) Optimal sensor placement for health monitoring of high-rise structure based on genetic algorithm. J Math Probl Eng 11(395101):12

    Google Scholar 

  26. AISI (2010) North American specification for the design of cold-formed steel structural members. American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  27. Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings (2005) Standard no. 2800, Iranian building codes and standards, Building and Housing research center, Iran

  28. Building Seismic Safety Council (2004) NEHRP recommended provisions and commentary for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures (FEMA 450), 2003rd edn. Washington DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  29. http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat/search.html

  30. UBC (1997) Uniform Building Code. International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California, USA

  31. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Reading, Mass., USA, p 412 xiii

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Tongpadungrod P, Rhys TDL, Brett PN (2003) An approach to optimise the critical sensor locations in one-dimensional novel distributive tactile surface to maximize performance. Sensors Actuators 105(1):47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Huang WP, Liu J, Li HJ (2005) Optimal sensor placement based on genetic algorithms. Eng Mech 22(1):113–117

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Guo HY, Zhang L, Zhang LL, Zhou JX (2004) Optimal placement of sensors for structural health monitoring using improved genetic algorithms. Smart Mater Struct 13(3):528–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Carne TG, Dohrmann CR (1995) A modal test design strategy for model correlation. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference, February 13–16, Tennessee, USA

  36. Dong C (1998) Generalized genetic algorithm. Explor Nature 63(17):33–37

    Google Scholar 

  37. Li D (2011) Sensor placement methods and evaluation criteria in structural health monitoring: degree of Ph.D. in Mechatronics. Universität Siegen, Siegen

    Google Scholar 

  38. ASCE standard code (2005) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE, USA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Gupta AK, Hassan T, Gupta A (1996) Correlation coefficients for modal response combination of non-classically damped systems. Nucl Eng Des 165(1–2):67–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran

    Seyed Kazem Sadat Shokouhi & Hamid Reza Vosoughifar

Authors
  1. Seyed Kazem Sadat Shokouhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamid Reza Vosoughifar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seyed Kazem Sadat Shokouhi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sadat Shokouhi, S.K., Vosoughifar, H.R. Optimal sensor placement in the lightweight steel framing structures using the novel TTFD approach subjected to near-fault earthquakes. J Civil Struct Health Monit 3, 257–267 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-013-0053-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-013-0053-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation