Advertisement

An Exploratory Study on Removing Environmental and Operational Effects Using a Regime-Switching Cointegration Method

  • Haichen ShiEmail author
  • Keith Worden
  • Elizabeth J. Cross
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

Cointegration is a property of some nonstationary time series; it is now widely adopted in various econometric analyses. Recently, cointegration has been successfully adapted to address the issue of environmental and operational variations (EOVs) in structural health monitoring. However, cointegration is a linear algorithm, while many real world structures may exhibit nonlinear behaviour under EOVs. The aim of this paper is to introduce a novel nonlinear cointegration approach, as an extension of the previous work on cointegration. More specifically, the cointegrating relationship is allowed to switch from one regime to another; the augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test statistic is utilised as a tool to determine where to activate the switch. The Johansen procedure is adopted for estimating the cointegration relationship. The proposed approach will be examined with a synthetic example, showing that EOVs can be effectively eliminated.

Keywords

Nonlinear cointegration Structural health monitoring Environmental and operational variation Regime switching Nonstationary time series 

References

  1. 1.
    Farrar, C.R., Worden, K.: Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning Perspective. Wiley, New York (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sohn, H.: Effects of environmental and operational variability on structural health monitoring. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 365 (1851), 539–560 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Engle, R.F., Granger, C.W.: Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55, 251–276 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cross, E.J., Worden, K., Chen, Q.: Cointegration: a novel approach for the removal of environmental trends in structural health monitoring data. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, The Royal Society (2011). doi:p. rspa20110023Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cross, E., Manson, G., Worden, K., Pierce, S.: Features for damage detection with insensitivity to environmental and operational variations. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, The Royal Society (2012). doi:p. rspa20120031Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dao, P.B., Staszewski, W.J.: Cointegration approach for temperature effect compensation in Lamb-wave-based damage detection. Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (9), 095002 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cross, E.J. Worden, K.: Approaches to nonlinear cointegration with a view towards applications in SHM. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 305, 012069 (2011). IOP Publishing, BristolGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zolna, K., Dao, P.B., Staszewski, W.J., Barszcz, T.: Towards homoscedastic nonlinear cointegration for structural health monitoring. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 75, 94–108 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shi, H., Worden, K., Cross, E.J.: A nonlinear cointegration approach with applications to structural health monitoring. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 744, 012025 (2016). IOP Publishing, BristolGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cross, E.J.: On structural health monitoring in changing environmental and operational conditions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sheffield (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dickey, D.A., Fuller, W.A.: Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 74 (366a), 427–431 (1979)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamilton, J.D.: Time Series Analysis, vol. 2. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Perman, R.: Cointegration: an introduction to the literature. J. Econ. Stud. 18 (3), 3–30 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Enders, W.: Applied Econometric Time Series. Wiley, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johansen, S.: Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Worden, K., Cross, E., Antoniadou, I., Kyprianou, A.: A multiresolution approach to cointegration for enhanced SHM of structures under varying conditions - an exploratory study. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 47 (1), 243–262 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Balke, N.S., Fomby, T.B.: Threshold cointegration. Int. Econ. Rev. 38, 627–645 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hansen, B.E., Seo, B.: Testing for two-regime threshold cointegration in vector error-correction models. J. Econ. 110 (2), 293–318 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lo, M.C., Zivot, E.: Threshold cointegration and nonlinear adjustment to the law of one price. Macroecon. Dyn. 5 (4), 533–576 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gregory, A.W., Hansen, B.E.: Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. J. Econ. 70 (1), 99–126 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cross, E.J., Koo, K., Brownjohn, J., Worden, K.: Long-term monitoring and data analysis of the Tamar Bridge. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 35 (1), 16–34 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haichen Shi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Keith Worden
    • 1
  • Elizabeth J. Cross
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dynamics Research GroupUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations