Mitigation of model error effects in neural network-based structural damage detection

This paper proposes a damage detection procedure based on neural networks that is able to account for the model error in the network training. Vibration-based damage detection procedures relied on machine learning techniques hold great promises for the identification of structural damage thanks to their efficiency even in presence of noise-corrupted data. However, it is rarely possible in the context of civil engineering to have large amount of data related to the damaged condition of a structure to train a neural network. Numerical models are then necessary to simulate damaged scenarios. However, even if a finite element model is accurately calibrated, experimental results and model predictions will never exactly match and their difference represents the model error. Being the neural network tested and trained with respect to the data generated from the numerical model, the model error can significantly compromise the effectiveness of the damage detection procedure. The paper presents a procedure aimed at mitigating the effect of model errors when using models associated to the neural network. The proposed procedure is applied to two case studies, namely a numerical case represented by a steel railway bridge and a real structure. The real case study is a steel braced frame widely adopted as a benchmark structure for structural health monitoring purposes. Although in the first case the procedure is carried out considering simulated data, we have taken into account some key aspects to make results representative of real applications, namely the stochastic modelling of measurement errors and the use of two different numerical models to account for the model error. Different networks are investigated that stand out for the preprocessing of the dynamic features given as input. Results show the importance of accounting for the model error in the network calibration to efficiently identify damage.

[1]  G. Fabbrocino,et al.  A discussion about the Douglas-Reid model updating method and its prospective application to continuous vibration-based SHM of a historical building , 2022, Engineering Structures.

[2]  Henrik Nielsen,et al.  A review of the Digital Twin technology for fault detection in buildings , 2022, Frontiers in Built Environment.

[3]  S. Klepac,et al.  A case study and parametric analysis of predicting hurricane-induced building damage using data-driven machine learning approach , 2022, Frontiers in Built Environment.

[4]  Onur Avcı,et al.  A literature review: Generative adversarial networks for civil structural health monitoring , 2022, Frontiers in Built Environment.

[5]  G. Bartoli,et al.  Bayesian-based model updating using natural frequency data for historic masonry towers , 2022, Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics.

[6]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  Bayesian and deterministic surrogate-assisted approaches for model updating of historical masonry towers , 2022, Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring.

[7]  Maria Giovanna Masciotta,et al.  Modal-based FE model updating via genetic algorithms: Exploiting artificial intelligence to build realistic numerical models of historical structures , 2021 .

[8]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  A multi-objective optimization approach for FE model updating based on a selection criterion of the preferred Pareto-optimal solution , 2021 .

[9]  Yong Xia,et al.  Review on the new development of vibration-based damage identification for civil engineering structures: 2010–2019 , 2021 .

[10]  Rui Calçada,et al.  Model-based damage identification of railway bridges using genetic algorithms , 2020 .

[11]  Stefano Lenci,et al.  A Genetic Algorithm Procedure for the Automatic Updating of FEM Based on Ambient Vibration Tests , 2020, Sensors.

[12]  Onur Avci,et al.  A Review of Vibration-Based Damage Detection in Civil Structures: From Traditional Methods to Machine Learning and Deep Learning Applications , 2020, ArXiv.

[13]  Gianni Bartoli,et al.  A Bayesian model updating framework for robust seismic fragility analysis of non-isolated historic masonry towers , 2019, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A.

[14]  F. Mancini,et al.  Dynamic monitoring and evaluation of bell ringing effects for the structural assessment of a masonry bell tower , 2019, Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring.

[15]  Cristina Castagnetti,et al.  Dynamic Assessment of Masonry Towers Based on Terrestrial Radar Interferometer and Accelerometers , 2019, Sensors.

[16]  Xue Ying,et al.  An Overview of Overfitting and its Solutions , 2019, Journal of Physics: Conference Series.

[17]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  Human-induced vibrations of a curved cable-stayed footbridge , 2018, Journal of Constructional Steel Research.

[18]  Takehisa Yairi,et al.  A review on the application of deep learning in system health management , 2018, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing.

[19]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  Ambient vibration‐based finite element model updating of an earthquake‐damaged masonry tower , 2018 .

[20]  Gabriele Comanducci,et al.  On vibration-based damage detection by multivariate statistical techniques: Application to a long-span arch bridge , 2016 .

[21]  Onur Avci,et al.  Nonparametric structural damage detection algorithm for ambient vibration response: utilizing artificial neural networks and self-organizing maps , 2016 .

[22]  Claudio Mazzotti,et al.  Dynamic identification of an ancient masonry bell tower using a MEMS-based acquisition system , 2015, 2015 IEEE Workshop on Environmental, Energy, and Structural Monitoring Systems (EESMS) Proceedings.

[23]  Michele Betti,et al.  Damage detection on a three-storey steel frame using artificial neural networks and genetic algorithms , 2015 .

[24]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Random Search for Hyper-Parameter Optimization , 2012, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[25]  Edwin Reynders,et al.  System Identification Methods for (Operational) Modal Analysis: Review and Comparison , 2012 .

[26]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Machine learning algorithms for damage detection under operational and environmental variability , 2011 .

[27]  Bart De Moor,et al.  Subspace Identification for Linear Systems: Theory ― Implementation ― Applications , 2011 .

[28]  Maria Pina Limongelli,et al.  Frequency response function interpolation for damage detection under changing environment , 2010 .

[29]  Hong Hao,et al.  Substructuring Technique for Damage Detection Using Statistical Multi-Stage Artificial Neural Network , 2010 .

[30]  Carlo Rainieri,et al.  Automated output-only dynamic identification of civil engineering structures , 2010 .

[31]  Sylvain Arlot,et al.  A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection , 2009, 0907.4728.

[32]  Ching-Tai Ng,et al.  The selection of pattern features for structural damage detection using an extended Bayesian ANN algorithm , 2008 .

[33]  Radford M. Neal Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2007, Technometrics.

[34]  Ranjan Ganguli,et al.  Damage Detection in Beams using Spatial Fourier Analysis and Neural Networks , 2007 .

[35]  Michael I Friswell,et al.  Damage identification using inverse methods , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[36]  Ka-Veng Yuen,et al.  On the complexity of artificial neural networks for smart structures monitoring , 2006 .

[37]  Shirley J. Dyke,et al.  Experimental Phase II of the Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Problem , 2003 .

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

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

[40]  Guido De Roeck,et al.  REFERENCE-BASED STOCHASTIC SUBSPACE IDENTIFICATION FOR OUTPUT-ONLY MODAL ANALYSIS , 1999 .

[41]  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 .

[42]  A. K. Pandey,et al.  Damage Detection in Structures Using Changes in Flexibility , 1994 .

[43]  Fionn Murtagh,et al.  Multilayer perceptrons for classification and regression , 1991, Neurocomputing.

[44]  Arun Kumar Pandey,et al.  Damage detection from changes in curvature mode shapes , 1991 .

[45]  M. F. Møller A Scaled Conjugate Gradient Algorithm for Fast Supervised Learning , 1990 .

[46]  Frank Rosenblatt,et al.  PRINCIPLES OF NEURODYNAMICS. PERCEPTRONS AND THE THEORY OF BRAIN MECHANISMS , 1963 .

[47]  K. Maes,et al.  Validation of vibration-based structural health monitoring on retrofitted railway bridge KW51 , 2022, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing.

[48]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  A proper infill sampling strategy for improving the speed performance of a Surrogate-Assisted Evolutionary Algorithm , 2017 .

[49]  Mohamed Ettaouil,et al.  Multilayer Perceptron: Architecture Optimization and Training , 2016, Int. J. Interact. Multim. Artif. Intell..

[50]  Loris Vincenzi,et al.  Identification of the Manhattan bridge dynamic properties for fatigue Assessment , 2013 .

[51]  Palle Thoft-Christensen,et al.  Safety, Reliability, Risk and Life-Cycle Performance of Structures and Infrastructures , 2013 .

[52]  Tshilidzi Marwala,et al.  Model selection in finite element model updating using the Bayesian evidence statistic , 2011 .

[53]  Rune Brincker,et al.  Modal identification of output-only systems using frequency domain decomposition , 2001 .

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

[55]  J. M. N. Silva,et al.  ON THE GENERALISATION OF THE TRANSMISSIBILITY CONCEPT , 2000 .

[56]  B. Moor,et al.  Subspace identification for linear systems , 1996 .

[57]  S. Hyakin,et al.  Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation , 1994 .