Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application of deep learning neural network to identify collision load conditions based on permanent plastic deformation of shell structures

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Computational Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this work, we have developed a novel deep learning inverse solution or identification method to determine and identify the impact load conditions of shell structures based on their final state of damage or inelastic deformation. This artificial intelligence approach offers a practical solution to solve the inverse problem of engineering failure analysis based on final material and structure damage state and permanent plastic deformation. More precisely, the machine learning inverse problem solver may provide a practical solution to characterize failure load parameters and conditions based on the final permanent plastic deformation distribution of the shell structure that is under examination. In this work, we have demonstrated that the proposed deep learning method can accurately identify a “practically unique” static loading condition as well as the impact dynamic loading condition for a hemispherical shell structure based the permanent plastic deformation after the impact event as the forensic signatures. The data-driven based method developed in this work may provide a powerful tool for forensically diagnosing, determining, and identifying damage loading conditions for engineering structures in various accidental failure events, such as car crashes, pressure vessel failure, or thin-walled infrastructure structure collapses. The machine learning inverse problem solver developed here in this work may have potential impacts on general forensic material and structure failure analysis based on final permanent plastic deformations.

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
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ren S, Chen G, Li T, Chen Q, Li S (2018) A deep learning-based computational algorithm for identifying damage load condition: an artificial intelligence inverse problem solution for failure analysis. Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 117(3):287–307

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sebastiani F (2002) Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Comput Surv 34(1):1–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bratko A, Cormack GV, Filipia B, Lynam TR, Zupan B (2006) Spam filtering using statistical data compression models. J Mach Learn Res 7:2673–2698

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Sajda P (2006) Machine learning for detection and diagnosis of disease. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 8:537–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2001) The elements ofstatistical learning, vol 1. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bishop CM (2006) Pattern recognition and machine learning. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones A, Keatley AC, Goulermas JY, Scott TB, Turner P, Awbery R, Stapleton M (2018) Machine learning techniques to repurpose Uranium Ore Concentrate (UOC) industrial records and their application to nuclear forensic investigation. Appl Geochem 91:221–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mena J (2016) Machine learning forensics for law enforcement, security, and intelligence. Auerbach Publications, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Lei X, Liu C, Du Z, Zhang W, Guo X (2019) Machine learning-driven real-time topology optimization under moving morphable component-based framework. J Appl Mech 86(1):011004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zheng X, Zheng P, Zhang RZ (2018) Machine learning material properties from the periodic table using convolutional neural networks. Chem Sci 9(44):8426–8432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kirchdoerfer T, Ortiz M (2018) Data-driven computing in dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 113(11):1697–1710

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Yan W, Lin S, Kafka OL, Lian Y, Yu C, Liu Z, Yan J, Wolff S, Wu H, Ndip-Agbor E, Mozaffar M (2018) Data-driven multi-scale multi-physics models to derive process “structure” property relationships for additive manufacturing. Comput Mech 61(5):521–541

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Bostanabad R, Kearney T, Tao S, Apley DW, Chen W (2018) Leveraging the nugget parameter for efficient Gaussian process modeling. Int J Numer Methods Eng 114(5):501–516

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2013) An introduction to statistical learning, vol 112. Springer, New York, p 18

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Principal component analysis (2019). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_component_analysis. Accessed 28 Mar 2019

  16. Shlens J (2014) A tutorial on principal component analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1404.1100

  17. Lu X, Giovanis DG, Yvonnet J, Papadopoulos V, Detrez F, Bai J (2018) A data-driven computational homogenization method based on neural networks for the nonlinear anisotropic electrical response of graphene/polymer nanocomposites. Comput. Mech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-018-1643-0

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenblatt F (1958) The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychol Review 65(6):386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grossberg SE (1988) Neural networks and natural intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Kerlirzin P, Vallet F (1993) Robustness in multilayer perceptrons. Neural Comput 5(3):473–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Haykin S (1994) Neural networks, vol 2. Prentice hall, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Mhaskar HN, Poggio T (2016) Deep vs. shallow networks: an approximation theory perspective. Anal Appl 14(06):829–848

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521(7553):436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Funahashi KI (1989) On the approximate realization of continuous mappings by neural networks. Neural Netw 2(3):183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hornik K, Stinchcombe M, White H (1989) Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators. Neural Netw 2(5):359–366

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Bianchini M, Scarselli F (2014) On the complexity of neural network classifiers: a comparison between shallow and deep architectures. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 25(8):1553–1565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gao Y, Mosalam KM (2018) Deep transfer learning for image—based structural damage recognition. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 33(9):748–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nair V, Hinton GE (2010) Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on machine learning (ICML-10), pp 807–814

  29. Kingma DP, Ba J (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980

  30. Hibbitt H, Karlsson B, Sorensen P (2011) Abaqus analysis user’s manual version 6.10. Dassault Systmes Simulia Corp., Providence

    Google Scholar 

  31. Guo YB, Yen DW (2004) A FEM study on mechanisms of discontinuous chip formation in hard machining. J Mater Process Technol 155:1350–1356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. TensorFlow. Tf.losses.Reduction – TensorFlow. https://www.tensorflow.org/api_docs/python/tf/losses/Reduction. Accessed 27 Mar 2019

Download references

Acknowledgements

Mr. G. Chen is supported by a graduate fellowship from Chinese Scholar Council (CSC), and this support is gratefully appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410075, China

    Guorong Chen

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, USA

    Guorong Chen, Tiange Li, Qijun Chen, Shaofei Ren, Chao Wang & Shaofan Li

Authors
  1. Guorong Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tiange Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Qijun Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shaofei Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shaofan Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaofan Li.

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

Chen, G., Li, T., Chen, Q. et al. Application of deep learning neural network to identify collision load conditions based on permanent plastic deformation of shell structures. Comput Mech 64, 435–449 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-019-01706-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-019-01706-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation