Feature Assimilation in Structural Health Monitoring Applications

  • Saurabh Prabhu
  • Jordan Supler
  • Sez Atamturktur
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)


Next generation structural health monitoring (SHM) technology for early detection and mitigation of adverse structural effects holds the potential to aid in the proactive maintenance of various civil structures. SHM techniques eliminate the need for a priori knowledge of damage, and thus the need for access to the damaged portion of the structure. The underlying principle behind SHM is measuring changes in the system vibration response, which would ultimately indicate changes in the physical properties due to structural damage. A challenge to the successful application of SHM to civil structures is the selection of suitable vibration response features (damage indicators), that are highly sensitive to the presence and extent of damage, while having low sensitivity to ambient noise. Since it is not feasible (nor possible) to damage an in-service structure for research purposes, a scaled arch model made of PVC is utilized for laboratory testing in this study. The vibration response is measured both for the undamaged arch and then for the damaged arch once cracks are introduced to the system. The effect of noise on the vibration measurements is also studied.


Vibration Testing Data Fusion Damage Sensitivity Noise Sensitivity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ceravolo R., De De Stefano A., and Ruocci G. “Modal identification of an experimental model of masonry arch bridge,” Key Engineering Materials, 413-414, 707-714, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maeck, J. Damage Assessment of Civil Engineering Structures by Vibration Monitoring, Ph.D Thesis, Katholieke University, Leuven, Belgium, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garaygordóbil, J.C.A. Dynamics Assessment of Structural Building Components, Ph.D. Thesis, Universitat Politècnica de Catalynya, Barcelona, Spain, 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Begg, R.D., Mackenzie, A.C., Dodds, C.J., and Loland, O. “Structural Integrity Monitoring Using Digital Processing of Vibration Signals,” in Proceedings of 8th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, 305-311, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duggan, D.M., Wallace, E.R., and Caldwell, S.R. “Measured and Predicted Vibrational Behavior of Gulf of Mexico Platforms,” in Proceedings of 12th Annual Offshore Technical Conference, 92-100, 1980.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fox, C.H.J. “the Location of Defects in Structures: A Comparison of the use of Natural Frequency and Mode Shape Data,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference, 522-528, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Farrar, C.R., Baker, W.E., Bell, T.M., Cone, K.M., Darling, T.W., Duffey, T.A., Eklund, A., and Migliori, A. “Dynamic Characterization and Damage Detection in the I-40 Bridge Over the Rio Grande,” Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-12767-MS, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ju, F. and Mimovich, M. “Modal Frequency Method in Diagnosis of Fracture Damage in Structures, In Proceedings of the 4th Internatinal Modal Analysis Conference, 1168-1174, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rizos, P., Aspragathos, N. and Dimarogonas, A. “Identification of crack location and magnitude in a cantilever beam from the vibration modes,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, 138(3), 381-388, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dong, C., Zhang, P.Q., Feng, W.Q., and Huang, T.C. “The Sensitivity Study of the Modal Parameters of a Cracked Beam,” in Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference, 98-104, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meneghetti, U., Maggiore, A. "Crack Detection by Sensitivity Analysis," in Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis Conference, 1292-1298, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fritzen, C.P., Seibold, S., and Buchen, D. “Application of filter Techniques for Damage Identification in Linear and Nonlinear Mechanical Structures,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Modal Analysis Conference, 1874-1881, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramos, L. F. 2007, “Damage Identification on Masonry Structures Based on Vibration Signatures,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minho.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chondros, T. G., Dimarogonas, A. D., and Yao J. “A Continuous Cracked Beam Vibration Theory,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, 215(1), 17-34, 1998.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Atamturktur, S., Pavic, A., Reynolds, P., and Boothby, T. “FULL‐SCALE MODAL TESTING OF VAULTED GOTHIC CHURCHES: LESSONS LEARNED.” Exp Tech, 33(4), 65-74, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gentile and Saisi. 2008.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Panday, A.K., Biswas, M. and Samman, M.M. “Damage detection from changes in curvature modes shapes,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, 145(2), 221-332, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ewins D. J. and Ho Y. K. “On the Structural Damage Identification with Mode Shapes,” Proceedings of the Conference held in E.T.S.I. Aeronauticos, Madrid, June 2000, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Spain, 677-683, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saurabh Prabhu
    • 1
  • Jordan Supler
    • 1
  • Sez Atamturktur
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations