A Global Method for Structural Damage Detection Part II: A Comparative Study and Verification

To identify structural damages many different methods have already been developed. Evaluating the performance of these methods is not a convenient task because they have been applied to different structures or constructed for specific purposes. Most of these methods use model-updating techniques, as a tool, to detect and assess damage. On the other hand some methods, including Energy Index Method, use the concept of strain energy to detect damage. This paper tries to compare the performance of Energy Index method with the performance of a model-updating-based model. In order to facilitate the comparison of various damage identification methods a structure proposed by the IASC-ASCE Task Group on Structural Health Monitoring is considered as the benchmark structure. Finally, the effects of measurement noise and incompleteness of data on the performance of the proposed algorithm are investigated.

[1]  Edward Sazonov,et al.  An automated damage detection system for armored vehicle launched bridge , 2002 .

[2]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  A review of structural health monitoring literature 1996-2001 , 2002 .

[3]  Yong. Xia,et al.  Condition assessment of structures using dynamic data. , 2002 .

[4]  Abdollah Bagheri,et al.  Structural damage identification based on incomplete static responses as an optimization problem , 2014 .

[5]  Luciana R. Barroso,et al.  Damage Detection Utilizing the Damage Index Method to a Benchmark Structure , 2004 .

[6]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  AN EXPERIMENTAL BENCHMARK PROBLEM IN STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING , 2001 .

[7]  Keith Hjelmstad,et al.  Identification of Damage in Structural Systems Using Modal Data , 2001 .

[8]  Keith Hjelmstad,et al.  STRUCTURAL DAMAGE DETECTION AND ASSESSMENT FROM MODAL RESPONSE , 2003 .

[9]  Hoi Wai Shih,et al.  Damage assessment in structures using vibration characteristics , 2009 .

[10]  John B. Mander,et al.  A simple LMS‐based approach to the structural health monitoring benchmark problem , 2005 .

[11]  Zhikun Hou,et al.  Application of Wavelet Approach for ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Studies , 2004 .

[12]  Yu Lei,et al.  Hilbert-Huang Based Approach for Structural Damage Detection , 2004 .

[13]  Bor-Tsuen Wang,et al.  Damage detection of surface cracks in composite laminates using modal analysis and strain energy method , 2006 .

[14]  David P. Thambiratnam,et al.  Vibration based structural damage detection in flexural members using multi-criteria approach , 2009 .

[15]  Dionisio Bernal,et al.  Flexibility-Based Approach for Damage Characterization: Benchmark Application , 2004 .

[16]  Wei Fan.  HEALTH MONITORING AND DAMAGE IDENTIFICATION OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURES , 2011 .

[17]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  NATURAL EXCITATION TECHNIQUE AND EIGENSYSTEM REALIZATION ALGORITHM FOR PHASE I OF THE IASC-ASCE BENCHMARK PROBLEM: SIMULATED DATA , 2004 .

[18]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Phase I IASC-ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Problem Using Simulated Data , 2004 .

[19]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical systems from changes in their vibration characteristics: A literature review , 1996 .

[20]  Keith Hjelmstad,et al.  Identification of structural systems from measured response , 1993 .

[21]  Lambros S. Katafygiotis,et al.  Application of a Statistical Model Updating Approach on Phase I of the IASC-ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Study , 2004 .