Damage identification in plates under uncertain boundary conditions

Abstract Nondestructive damage identification is a central task in industrial applications in, for example, aeronautical, civil and naval engineering. The identification approaches based on (physical) models rely on the accuracy of the model predictions, and typically suffer from effects caused by ubiquitous modeling errors and uncertainties. The identification problems are typically unstable inverse problems but may also be (apparently) stable when considering low dimensional parametrizations for the defects. The present paper considers the identification of defects in plates under uncertain boundary conditions. To partially compensate for the boundary uncertainties, we adopt the Bayesian framework for inverse problems and use approximate marginalization over the model uncertainties: the process of marginalization propagates the model uncertainties to the uncertainties in the estimated parameters. We employ a low dimensional parametrization for the defects, which would, in principle, allow for least squares or the more general maximum likelihood estimation approaches. We will show, however, that under uncertain boundary conditions, maximum likelihood estimates can yield unfeasible estimates while the approximate marginalization over uncertainties provides feasible ones.

[1]  P. Khazaeinejad,et al.  Vibration Characteristics of Functionally Graded Plates with Non-Ideal Boundary Conditions , 2012 .

[2]  Jari P. Kaipio,et al.  Approximation error approach in spatiotemporally chaotic models with application to Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation , 2018, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[3]  George S. Dulikravich,et al.  A Survey of Basic Deterministic, Heuristic, and Hybrid Methods for Single-Objective Optimization and Response Surface Generation , 2011 .

[4]  D. A. Castello,et al.  Detecting and classifying interfacial defects by inverse ultrasound scattering analysis , 2016 .

[5]  S. S. Law,et al.  Differentiating damage effects in a structural component from the time response , 2010 .

[6]  Christian Cremona,et al.  Assessment of vibration-based damage identification techniques , 2006 .

[7]  Jari P. Kaipio,et al.  Modeling errors due to Timoshenko approximation in damage identification , 2019, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering.

[8]  Catherine E. Powell,et al.  An Introduction to Computational Stochastic PDEs , 2014 .

[9]  Gabriel Lucas Sousa da Silva,et al.  Compensation of model uncertainties in damage identification by means of the approximation error approach , 2018 .

[10]  Mehmet Pakdemirli,et al.  Effects of non-ideal boundary conditions on the vibrations of a slightly curved micro beam , 2012 .

[11]  E. Somersalo,et al.  Statistical inverse problems: discretization, model reduction and inverse crimes , 2007 .

[12]  Y. Narkis,et al.  Crack identification in a cantilever beam under uncertain end conditions , 1996 .

[13]  Costas Papadimitriou,et al.  Probabilistic damage identification of a designed 9-story building using modal data in the presence of modeling errors , 2017 .

[14]  E. Somersalo,et al.  Approximation errors and model reduction with an application in optical diffusion tomography , 2006 .

[15]  Michele Dilena,et al.  Crack identification in rods and beams under uncertain boundary conditions , 2017 .

[16]  Simon R. Arridge,et al.  Corrections to linear methods for diffuse optical tomography using approximation error modelling , 2010, Biomedical optics express.

[17]  J. Reddy Theory and Analysis of Elastic Plates and Shells , 2006 .

[18]  Stefan Finsterle,et al.  Approximation errors and truncation of computational domains with application to geophysical tomography , 2007 .

[19]  Yong Huang,et al.  State-of-the-art review on Bayesian inference in structural system identification and damage assessment , 2018, Advances in Structural Engineering.

[20]  Xuan Kong,et al.  The State-of-the-Art on Framework of Vibration-Based Structural Damage Identification for Decision Making , 2017 .

[21]  Jari P. Kaipio,et al.  Compensation of Modelling Errors Due to Unknown Domain Boundary in Electrical Impedance Tomography , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[22]  Zhengqi Lu,et al.  Damage identification in plates using finite element model updating in time domain , 2013 .

[23]  J. Kaipio,et al.  Estimation of aquifer dimensions from passive seismic signals in the presence of material and source uncertainties , 2015 .

[24]  Qiusheng Li,et al.  Eigenvalues of structures with uncertain elastic boundary restraints , 2007 .

[25]  Jari P. Kaipio,et al.  Aristotelian prior boundary conditions , 2006 .

[26]  Estimation of aquifer dimensions from passive seismic signals with approximate wave propagation models , 2014 .

[27]  Albert Tarantola,et al.  Inverse problem theory - and methods for model parameter estimation , 2004 .

[28]  M. Géradin,et al.  Mechanical Vibrations: Theory and Application to Structural Dynamics , 1994 .

[29]  B. Goller,et al.  Investigation of model uncertainties in Bayesian structural model updating , 2011, Journal of sound and vibration.

[30]  Simon R. Arridge,et al.  Direct Estimation of Optical Parameters From Photoacoustic Time Series in Quantitative Photoacoustic Tomography , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[31]  J. Kaipio,et al.  RECONSTRUCTION OF DOMAIN BOUNDARY AND CONDUCTIVITY IN ELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE TOMOGRAPHY USING THE APPROXIMATION ERROR APPROACH , 2011 .

[32]  Sanghyun Choi,et al.  Nondestructive damage identification in plate structures using changes in modal compliance , 2005 .

[33]  Thiago G. Ritto,et al.  Uncertain boundary condition Bayesian identification from experimental data: A case study on a cantilever beam , 2016 .

[34]  J. Kaipio,et al.  Compensation of errors due to discretization, domain truncation and unknown contact impedances in electrical impedance tomography , 2009 .

[35]  James L. Beck,et al.  A Bayesian probabilistic approach to structural health monitoring , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 American Control Conference (Cat. No. 99CH36251).

[36]  Usik Lee,et al.  A structural damage identification method for plate structures , 2002 .

[37]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  A Bayesian Probabilistic Approach for Structure Damage Detection , 1997 .

[38]  J. Kaipio,et al.  Approximation error analysis in nonlinear state estimation with an application to state-space identification , 2007 .

[39]  J. Beck,et al.  Updating Models and Their Uncertainties. I: Bayesian Statistical Framework , 1998 .

[40]  Christian Soize,et al.  Nonparametric stochastic modeling of structures with uncertain boundary conditions / coupling between substructures , 2013 .

[41]  Tanja Tarvainen,et al.  MARGINALIZATION OF UNINTERESTING DISTRIBUTED PARAMETERS IN INVERSE PROBLEMS-APPLICATION TO DIFFUSE OPTICAL TOMOGRAPHY , 2011 .

[42]  Babak Moaveni,et al.  Effects of changing ambient temperature on finite element model updating of the Dowling Hall Footbridge , 2012 .

[43]  Costas Papadimitriou,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian model updating for structural identification , 2015 .

[44]  I. Smith,et al.  Structural identification with systematic errors and unknown uncertainty dependencies , 2013 .

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

[46]  Jari P. Kaipio,et al.  Bayesian approximation error approach in full-wave ultrasound tomography , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control.

[47]  J. Kaipio,et al.  The Bayesian approximation error approach for electrical impedance tomography—experimental results , 2007 .

[48]  Simon R. Arridge,et al.  An approximation error approach for compensating for modelling errors between the radiative transfer equation and the diffusion approximation in diffuse optical tomography , 2009 .