Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Model-free damage detection of a laboratory bridge using artificial neural networks

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

Abstract

This paper investigates a model-free damage detection method using a laboratory model of a steel arch bridge with a five-metre span. The efficiency of the algorithm was studied for various damage cases. The structure was excited with a rolling mass and seven accelerometers were used to record its response. An artificial neural network (ANN) was trained to predict the bridge accelerations based on data collected from the undamaged structure. Damage-sensitive features were defined as the root mean squared errors between the measured data and the ANN predictions. A baseline healthy state was established with which new data could be compared to. Outliers from the reference state were taken as an indication of damage. Two outlier detection methods were used: Mahalanobis distance and the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The method showed promising results and damage was successfully detected for four out of the five single damage cases. The gradual damage case was also detected, however, for some instances, greater damage did not result in an increase in the damage index. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test performed best at detecting small single damage cases, while Mahalanobis distance was better at tracking gradual damage.

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
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Owen W (1959) Special problems facing underdeveloped countries. Am Econ Rev 49(2):179–187. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1816113

  2. Bell B (2004) European railway bridge demography—deliverable D 1.2. Technical report, Sustainable Bridges Consortium

  3. Wenzel H (2009) Health monitoring of bridges. Wiley, Vienna

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Gonzalez I, Karoumi R (2015) BWIM aided damage detection in bridges using machine learning. J Civ Struct Health Monit 5(5):715–725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-015-0137-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Neves AC, González I, Leander J, Karoumi R (2017) Structural health monitoring of bridges: a model-free ANN-based approach to damage detection. J Civ Struct Health Monit 7(5):689–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-017-0252-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Khouri CE, Ignacio G, Carmelo G, Raid K (2017) Damage detection in railway bridges using machine learning: application to a historic structure. Proced Eng 199:1931–1936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. ASCE (2013) Structural identification of constructed systems approaches, methods, and technologies for effective practice of St-Id. Am Soc Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/41016(314)139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Laory I, Trinh TN, Posenato D, Smith IFC (2013) Model-free methodologies for data-interpretation during continuous monitoring of structures. J Comput Civ Eng 27(6):142. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Farrar Charles R, Keith W (2013) Structural health monitoring: a machine learning perspective, 1st edn. Wiley, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118443118

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Moyo P, Brownjohn JMW (2001) Bridge health monitoring using waveletanalysis. In: Proceedings of SPIE. The International Society for Optical Engineering, 43 (June): 17. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.429636. URLhttp://vibration.shef.ac.uk/doc/P00351.pdf

  11. Lee SG, Yun GJ, Shang S (2014) Reference-free damage detection for truss bridge structures by continuous relative wavelet entropy method. Struct Health Monit 13(3):307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921714522845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Moughty JJ, Casas JR (2017) Performance assessment of vibration parameters as damage indicators for bridge structures under ambient excitation. Proced Eng 199:1970–1975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wu X, Ghaboussi J, Garrett JH Jr (1992) Use of neural networks in detection of structural damage. Comput Struct 42(4):649–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(92)90132-J

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Pandey PC, Barai SV (1995) Multilayer perceptron in damage detection of bridge structures. Comput Struct 54(4):597–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(94)00377-f

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Niu L (2012) Monitoring of a frame structure model for damage identification using artificial neural networks. In: 2nd international conference on electronic and mechanical engineering and information technology, pp 438–441

  16. Niu L, Qun C (2013) Structural health monitoring and damage detection using neural networks. In: Third international conference on intelligent system design and engineering applications, pp 1302–1304. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISDEA.2012.307. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6455402/

  17. Gerard P, Nigel H (2008) ICE manual of bridge engineering, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford, London. https://doi.org/10.1680/mobe.34525.0001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Bilello C, Bergman LA, Kuchma D (2004) Experimental investigation of a small-scale bridge model under a moving mass. J Struct Eng 130(5):799–804. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:5(799)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Danut S, Simon J, Huajiang O, Mottershead John E (2009) Vibration of a continuous beam excited by a moving mass and experimental validation. J Phys Conf Ser 181:1. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/181/1/012084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ruffels A (2019) Acceleration data from a laboratory bridge excited using a single rolling Axle. Mendeley Data, V1

  21. Hao S, Oral B (2015) Optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring using discrete optimization. Smart Mater Struct 24:12. https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/24/12/125034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fang X, Luo H, Tang J (2005) Structural damage detection using neural network with learning rate improvement. Comput Struct 83(25–26):2150–2161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2005.02.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bishop CM (2006) Pattern recognition and machine learning, 1st edn. Springer, Singapore

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Figueiredo E, Park G, Farrar CR, Worden K, Figueiras J (2011) Machine learning algorithms for damage detection under operational and environmental variability. Struct Health Monit 10(6):559–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921710388971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Khoa NLD, Zhang B, Wang Y, Chen Y, Mustapha S (2014) Robust dimensionality reduction and damage detection approaches in structural health monitoring. Struct Health Monit 13(4):406–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921714532989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Santos A, Silva M, Santos R, Figueiredo E, Sales C, Costa JCWA (2016a) A global expectation-maximization based on memetic swarm optimization for structural damage detection. Struct Health Monit 15(5):610–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921716654433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. John JM, Joan RC (2018) Damage sensitivity evaluation of vibration parameters under ambient excitation, pp 1–3

  28. Pratt JW, Gibbons JD (1981) Concepts of nonparametric theory. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-5931-2

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Lilliefors HW (1967) On the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for normality with mean and variance. J Am Stat Assoc 62(318):399–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Magel RC, Wibowo SH (1997) Comparing the powers of the Wald–Wolfowitz and Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. Biometr J 39(6):665–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kanji Gopal K (2006) 100 statistical tests, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228020000900509

    Book  Google Scholar 

  32. Jasper S, Hugo L, Adams RP (2012) Practical Bayesian optimization of machine learning algorithms. In: Pereira F, Burges CJC, Bottou L, Weinberger KQ (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 25. Curran Associates Inc, New Yok, pp 2951–2959 arXiv:1206.2944S

    Google Scholar 

  33. Santos A, Figueiredo E, Silva MFM, Sales CS (2016b) Costa JCWA machine learning algorithms for damage detection: kernel-based approaches. J Sound Vib 363:584–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

    Aaron Ruffels, Ignacio Gonzalez & Raid Karoumi

  2. ELU Konsult AB, Stockholm, Sweden

    Aaron Ruffels

  3. Sweco AB, Stockholm, Sweden

    Ignacio Gonzalez

Authors
  1. Aaron Ruffels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ignacio Gonzalez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Raid Karoumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aaron Ruffels.

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

Ruffels, A., Gonzalez, I. & Karoumi, R. Model-free damage detection of a laboratory bridge using artificial neural networks. J Civil Struct Health Monit 10, 183–195 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-019-00375-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-019-00375-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation