An innovative hybrid strategy for structural health monitoring by modal flexibility and clustering methods

Abstract

Structural health monitoring is usually implemented by model-driven or data-driven methods. Both of them have their advantages and disadvantages. This article proposes an innovative hybrid strategy as a combination of model-driven and data-driven approaches to detecting and locating damage in civil structures. In this regard, modal flexibility matrices of the undamaged and damaged conditions are initially derived from their modal frequencies and mode shapes. Subsequently, the discrepancy between these matrices is proposed as a damage-sensitive feature. To increase damage detectability and localizability, the modal flexibility discrepancy matrix is expanded by the Kronecker product and then converted into a vector by a simple vectorization algorithm yielding vector-style feature samples. To detect and locate damage, this article introduces the k-medoids and density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise techniques. The vector-style feature samples are incorporated into these clustering methods to obtain two different damage indices including the direct clustering outputs and their Frobenius norms. The great novelty of this article is to develop an innovative hybrid strategy for damage detection and localization under noise-free and noisy conditions so that the damage-sensitive feature is obtained from a model-driven scheme and the decision-making is carried out by a data-driven strategy. A shear-building frame and the numerical model of the ASCE benchmark structure are used to validate the accuracy and performance of the proposed methods. Results demonstrate that the hybrid strategy presented here is influentially able to detect and locate damage in the presence of noisy modal data.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

References

  1. 1.

    Brownjohn JMW, De Stefano A, Xu Y-L, Wenzel H, Aktan AE (2011) Vibration-based monitoring of civil infrastructure: challenges and successes. J Civ Struct Health Monit 1(3):79–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-011-0009-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Mesquita E, Antunes P, Coelho F, André P, Arêde A, Varum H (2016) Global overview on advances in structural health monitoring platforms. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6(3):461–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Li H, Ou J (2016) The state of the art in structural health monitoring of cable-stayed bridges. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6(1):43–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Bukenya P, Moyo P, Beushausen H, Oosthuizen C (2014) Health monitoring of concrete dams: a literature review. J Civ Struct Health Monit 4(4):235–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Das S, Saha P, Patro S (2016) Vibration-based damage detection techniques used for health monitoring of structures: a review. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6(3):477–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Farrar CR, Worden K (2007) An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 365(1851):303–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Entezami A, Shariatmadar H, Ghalehnovi M (2014) Damage detection by updating structural models based on linear objective functions. J Civ Struct Health Monit 4(3):165–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-014-0072-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Entezami A, Shariatmadar H, Sarmadi H (2017) Structural damage detection by a new iterative regularization method and an improved sensitivity function. J Sound Vib 399:285–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2017.02.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Katebi L, Tehranizadeh M, Mohammadgholibeyki N (2018) A generalized flexibility matrix-based model updating method for damage detection of plane truss and frame structures. J Civ Struct Health Monit 8(2):301–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-018-0276-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Krishnanunni CG, Raj RS, Nandan D, Midhun CK, Sajith AS, Ameen M (2019) Sensitivity-based damage detection algorithm for structures using vibration data. J Civ Struct Health Monit 9(1):137–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-018-0317-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sehgal S, Kumar H (2016) Structural dynamic model updating techniques: a state of the art review. Arch Comput Methods Eng 23(3):515–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Sarmadi H, Karamodin A, Entezami A (2016) A new iterative model updating technique based on least squares minimal residual method using measured modal data. Appl Math Model 40(23):10323–10341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.07.015

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Rezaiee-Pajand M, Entezami A, Sarmadi H (2020) A sensitivity-based finite element model updating based on unconstrained optimization problem and regularized solution methods. Struct Control Health Monit 27(5):e2481. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.2481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Yin T, Jiang Q-H, Yuen K-V (2017) Vibration-based damage detection for structural connections using incomplete modal data by Bayesian approach and model reduction technique. Eng Struct 132:260–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Yuen KV, Beck JL, Katafygiotis LS (2006) Efficient model updating and health monitoring methodology using incomplete modal data without mode matching. Struct Control Health Monit 13(1):91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Sarmadi H, Karamodin A (2020) A novel anomaly detection method based on adaptive Mahalanobis-squared distance and one-class kNN rule for structural health monitoring under environmental effects. Mech Syst Signal Process 140:106495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.106495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Sarmadi H, Entezami A, Daneshvar Khorram M (2020) Energy-based damage localization under ambient vibration and non-stationary signals by ensemble empirical mode decomposition and Mahalanobis-squared distance. J Vib Control 26(11–12):1012–1027. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546319891306

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Entezami A, Sarmadi H, Behkamal B, Mariani S (2020) Big data analytics and structural health monitoring: a statistical pattern recognition-based approach. Sensors 20(8):2328. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20082328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Entezami A, Shariatmadar H, Karamodin A (2019) Data-driven damage diagnosis under environmental and operational variability by novel statistical pattern recognition methods. Struct Health Moni 18(5–6):1416–1443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Entezami A, Shariatmadar H (2019) Structural health monitoring by a new hybrid feature extraction and dynamic time warping methods under ambient vibration and non-stationary signals. Measurement 134:548–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.10.095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Figueiredo E, Cross E (2013) Linear approaches to modeling nonlinearities in long-term monitoring of bridges. J Civ Struct Health Monit 3(3):187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Diez A, Khoa NLD, Alamdari MM, Wang Y, Chen F, Runcie P (2016) A clustering approach for structural health monitoring on bridges. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6(3):429–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Neves A, Gonzalez 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Farrar CR, Worden K (2013) Structural health monitoring: a machine learning perspective. Wiley, Chichester, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Ghorbani E, Buyukozturk O, Cha Y-J (2020) Hybrid output-only structural system identification using random decrement and Kalman filter. Mech Syst Signal Process 144:106977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Ghannadi P, Kourehli SS (2019) Data-driven method of damage detection using sparse sensors installation by SEREPa. J Civil Struct Health Monit 9(4):459–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Duan Z, Yan G, Ou J, Spencer BF (2007) Damage detection in ambient vibration using proportional flexibility matrix with incomplete measured DOFs. Struct Control Health Monit 14(2):186–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Li J, Wu B, Zeng Q, Lim CW (2010) A generalized flexibility matrix based approach for structural damage detection. J Sound Vib 329(22):4583–4587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Sung S, Koo K, Jung H (2014) Modal flexibility-based damage detection of cantilever beam-type structures using baseline modification. J Sound Vib 333(18):4123–4138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Yan W-J, Ren W-X (2014) Closed-form modal flexibility sensitivity and its application to structural damage detection without modal truncation error. J Vib Control 20(12):1816–1830

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Zare Hosseinzadeh A, Ghodrati Amiri G, Seyed Razzaghi SA, Koo KY, Sung SH (2016) Structural damage detection using sparse sensors installation by optimization procedure based on the modal flexibility matrix. J Sound Vib 381(Supplement C):65–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.06.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Sarmadi H, Entezami A, Ghalehnovi M (2020) On model-based damage detection by an enhanced sensitivity function of modal flexibility and LSMR-Tikhonov method under incomplete noisy modal data. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01041-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Aghabozorgi S, Shirkhorshidi AS, Wah TY (2015) Time-series clustering—a decade review. Inf Syst 53:16–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Mahato S, Chakraborty A (2019) Sequential clustering of synchrosqueezed wavelet transform coefficients for efficient modal identification. J Civ Struct Health Monit 9(2):271–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-019-00326-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    da Silva S, Dias Júnior M, Lopes Junior V, Brennan MJ (2008) Structural damage detection by fuzzy clustering. Mech Syst Signal Process 22(7):1636–1649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2008.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Silva M, Santos A, Santos R, Figueiredo E, Sales C, Costa JC (2017) Agglomerative concentric hypersphere clustering applied to structural damage detection. Mech Syst Signal Process 92:196–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Langone R, Reynders E, Mehrkanoon S, Suykens JA (2017) Automated structural health monitoring based on adaptive kernel spectral clustering. Mech Syst Signal Process 90:64–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Mottershead JE, Link M, Friswell MI (2011) The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: a tutorial. Mech Syst Signal Process 25(7):2275–2296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2010.10.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Izenman AJ (2009) Modern multivariate statistical techniques: regression, classification, and manifold learning. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Aggarwal CC, Reddy CK (2016) Data clustering: algorithms and applications. CRC Press

  41. 41.

    Ester M, Kriegel H-P, Sander J, Xu X (1996) A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Portland, Oregon, US, vol 34. pp 226-231. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%290733-9399%282004%29130%3A1%283%29

  42. 42.

    Johnson EA, Lam HF, Katafygiotis LS, Beck JL (2004) Phase I International Association of Structural Control-American Society of Civil Engineer structural health monitoring benchmark problem using simulated data. J Eng Mech 130(1):3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Yuen K-V, Au SK, Beck JL (2004) Two-stage structural health monitoring approach for phase I benchmark studies. J Eng Mech 130(1):16–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hassan Sarmadi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Entezami, A., Sarmadi, H. & Saeedi Razavi, B. An innovative hybrid strategy for structural health monitoring by modal flexibility and clustering methods. J Civil Struct Health Monit 10, 845–859 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-020-00421-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Structural health monitoring
  • Modal flexibility
  • Noisy modal data
  • Clustering
  • k-medoids, DBSCAN