Experimental investigation on multi-objective multi-type sensor optimal placement for structural damage detection

An optimal sensor placement with multiple types of sensors could provide informative data of a structure to facilitate its structural damage detection. A response covariance-based multi-objective multi-type sensor optimal placement method has been thus developed. To validate this method, an experimental investigation was designed and performed in terms of a nine-bay three-dimensional frame structure, and the experimental details and results are presented in this article. The frame structure was first built, and a finite element model of the frame structure was constructed and updated. The proposed method was then applied to the finite element model to find the optimal sensor placement configuration. The multi-type sensors were then installed on the frame structure according to the determined optimal sensor numbers and positions. Different damage scenarios were then generated on the frame structure. These damage scenarios covered single and multiple damage cases occurring at different locations with different damage severities. A series of experiments, including the optimal and non-optimal sensor placements, were finally carried out, and the measurement data were used together with the finite element model to identify damage quantitatively. The identification results show that the optimal multi-type sensor placement determined by the proposed method could provide accurate damage localization and satisfactory damage quantitation and that the optimal sensor placement yielded better damage identification than the non-optimal sensor placement.

[1]  J. Bendat,et al.  Random Data: Analysis and Measurement Procedures , 1987 .

[2]  Songye Zhu,et al.  Multi-type sensor placement and response reconstruction for structural health monitoring of long-span suspension bridges , 2016 .

[3]  Bing-Feng Ju,et al.  Guided wave imaging of oblique reflecting interfaces in pipes using common-source synthetic focusing , 2018 .

[4]  Wei Liu,et al.  Optimal sensor placement for spatial lattice structure based on genetic algorithms , 2008 .

[5]  Ayan Sadhu,et al.  Blind source separation-based optimum sensor placement strategy for structures , 2017 .

[6]  Pizhong Qiao,et al.  Vibration-based Damage Identification Methods: A Review and Comparative Study , 2011 .

[7]  Michele Meo,et al.  On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure , 2005 .

[8]  Y. L. Xu,et al.  Two-Stage Covariance-Based Multisensing Damage Detection Method , 2017 .

[9]  Ling Yu,et al.  Nonlinear damage detection using higher statistical moments of structural responses , 2015 .

[10]  Songye Zhu,et al.  Integrated optimal placement of displacement transducers and strain gauges for better estimation of structural response , 2011 .

[11]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[12]  You-Lin Xu,et al.  Response covariance-based sensor placement for structural damage detection , 2018 .

[13]  Kamyoung Kim,et al.  A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm for Surveillance Sensor Placement , 2008 .

[14]  Siu-Seong Law,et al.  Structural damage detection-oriented multi-type sensor placement with multi-objective optimization , 2018 .

[15]  X. Y. Li,et al.  Adaptive Tikhonov regularization for damage detection based on nonlinear model updating , 2010 .

[16]  Hong-Nan Li,et al.  Methodology Developments in Sensor Placement for Health Monitoring of Civil Infrastructures , 2012, Int. J. Distributed Sens. Networks.

[17]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: A tutorial (vol 25, pg 2275, 2010) , 2011 .

[18]  Yl L. Xu,et al.  Optimal multi-type sensor placement for response and excitation reconstruction , 2016 .

[19]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  A Comprehensive Survey of Evolutionary-Based Multiobjective Optimization Techniques , 1999, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[20]  Ka-Veng Yuen,et al.  Efficient Bayesian sensor placement algorithm for structural identification: a general approach for multi‐type sensory systems , 2015 .

[21]  Wei Lu,et al.  Data correlation analysis for optimal sensor placement using a bond energy algorithm , 2016 .

[22]  Jasbir S. Arora,et al.  Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering , 2004 .

[23]  H. Jin,et al.  Sensor Placement Optimization for Damage Detection , 2008 .

[24]  Do Guen Yoo,et al.  Applications of network analysis and multi-objective genetic algorithm for selecting optimal water quality sensor locations in water distribution networks , 2015 .

[25]  Hyung-Jo Jung,et al.  A multi-scale sensing and diagnosis system combining accelerometers and gyroscopes for bridge health monitoring , 2013 .

[26]  You-Lin Xu,et al.  Structural Health Monitoring of Long-Span Suspension Bridges , 2011 .

[27]  Yi-Qing Ni,et al.  Optimal sensor placement for damage detection of bridges subject to ship collision , 2017 .

[28]  R. K. Ursem Multi-objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009 .

[29]  You-Lin Xu,et al.  A new statistical moment-based structural damage detection method , 2008 .

[30]  Avi Ostfeld,et al.  Multiobjective Contaminant Sensor Network Design for Water Distribution Systems , 2008 .

[31]  Jun Teng,et al.  Optimum wireless sensor deployment scheme for structural health monitoring: a simulation study , 2015 .

[32]  You-Lin Xu,et al.  Structural damage identification via multi-type sensors and response reconstruction , 2016 .

[33]  C. Papadimitriou Pareto optimal sensor locations for structural identification , 2005 .

[34]  M. Friswell,et al.  Finite–element model updating using experimental test data: parametrization and regularization , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[35]  Fu-Kuo Chang,et al.  Encyclopedia of structural health monitoring , 2009 .

[36]  David A. Nix,et al.  Vibration–based structural damage identification , 2001, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[37]  S. S. Law,et al.  Structural damage detection with statistical analysis from support excitation , 2008 .

[38]  Keith Worden,et al.  Sensor Placement Optimization , 2009 .

[39]  Songye Zhu,et al.  Testbed for Structural Health Monitoring of Long-Span Suspension Bridges , 2012 .

[40]  Chih-Chen Chang,et al.  Covariance-driven wavelet technique for structural damage assessment , 2006 .

[41]  Yi-Qing Ni,et al.  Information entropy based algorithm of sensor placement optimization for structural damage detection , 2012 .

[42]  Sheng Zhan,et al.  Multi-Type Sensor Placement for Multi-Scale Response Reconstruction , 2013 .

[43]  Guang-Dong Zhou,et al.  Energy‐aware wireless sensor placement in structural health monitoring using hybrid discrete firefly algorithm , 2015 .

[44]  Ian F. C. Smith,et al.  Optimal Sensor Placement for Damage Detection: Role of Global Search , 2007 .

[45]  Yong Xia,et al.  Experimental Investigation on Statistical Moment-based Structural Damage Detection Method , 2009 .

[46]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  Erratum to “The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: A tutorial” [Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 25(7) (2010) 2275–2296] , 2018 .

[47]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  A summary review of vibration-based damage identification methods , 1998 .

[48]  Heung-Fai Lam,et al.  Optimal sensor configuration of a typical transmission tower for the purpose of structural model updating , 2011 .