Robust damage detection using Bayesian virtual sensors

Abstract Structural health monitoring based on output-only vibration measurements is studied. In order to get an early warning of structural failure, the signal-to-noise ratio of the measurement data should be high. This can be achieved by applying virtual sensing to a redundant sensor network data. A Bayesian estimate of the signal of each sensor in the network is derived and proved to be more accurate than the actual measurement. The virtual sensor data then replace the actual measurements in the subsequent steps of damage detection. Another issue is the environmental or operational influences, which can mask the effects of damage. They can be removed by acquiring training data under different conditions and utilizing the correlation between the virtual sensors. Each sensor is estimated using the remaining virtual sensors in the network. The measurement of the underlying variables is not necessary. The residual is the difference between the estimated and the actual data. Residual generation using the virtual sensors is discussed in detail. The first principal component of the residual is then used as a damage-sensitive feature. An extreme value statistics (EVS) control chart with appropriate control limits and subgroup size is plotted for damage detection. Numerical simulations were performed for a bridge structure subject to unknown random excitations and various environmental effects. Damage was modelled as an open crack in a steel girder. Damage detection was performed in the time domain using the virtual sensor data. Virtual sensors outperformed the raw measurements in damage detection, making an early warning more plausible.

[1]  Sebastian Thöns,et al.  Vibration-based structural health monitoring of a wind turbine system Part II: Environmental/operational effects on dynamic properties , 2015 .

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

[3]  Michael I. Friswell,et al.  Sensor Validation for Structural Systems with Additive Sensor Faults , 2004 .

[4]  Gaëtan Kerschen,et al.  Structural damage diagnosis under varying environmental conditions - Part II: local PCA for non-linear cases , 2005 .

[5]  Michael I. Friswell,et al.  Sensor validation for structural systems with multiplicative sensor faults , 2007 .

[6]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  Statistical Damage Classification Under Changing Environmental and Operational Conditions , 2002 .

[7]  Daniel J. Inman,et al.  Sensor Validation for Smart Structures , 1999 .

[8]  Keith Worden,et al.  Cointegration: a novel approach for the removal of environmental trends in structural health monitoring data , 2011, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[9]  Thomas F. Edgar,et al.  Identification of faulty sensors using principal component analysis , 1996 .

[10]  S. Joe Qin,et al.  Joint diagnosis of process and sensor faults using principal component analysis , 1998 .

[11]  S. Coles,et al.  An Introduction to Statistical Modeling of Extreme Values , 2001 .

[12]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Variability of modal parameters measured on the alamosa canyon bridge , 1996 .

[13]  Filipe Magalhães,et al.  Continuous Dynamic Monitoring of Bridges: Different Perspectives of Application , 2013 .

[14]  Jyrki Kullaa,et al.  Eliminating Environmental or Operational Influences in Structural Health Monitoring using the Missing Data Analysis , 2009 .

[15]  A. Ray,et al.  An introduction to sensor signal validation in redundant measurement systems , 1991, IEEE Control Systems.

[16]  Rolf G. Rohrmann,et al.  Structural causes of temperature affected modal data of civil structures obtained by long time monitoring , 2000 .

[17]  Steven Kay,et al.  Fundamentals Of Statistical Signal Processing , 2001 .

[18]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  Environmental variability of modal properties , 1999 .

[19]  Jyrki Kullaa,et al.  Sensor validation using minimum mean square error estimation , 2010 .

[20]  Nasser M. Nasrabadi,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2006, Technometrics.

[21]  Peter Avitabile,et al.  Full-Field Dynamic Stress/Strain from Limited Sets of Measured Data , 2011 .

[22]  Peter Cawley,et al.  Structural health monitoring: Closing the gap between research and industrial deployment , 2018 .

[23]  Jean-Claude Golinval,et al.  Null subspace-based damage detection of structures using vibration measurements , 2006 .

[24]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Quality Control , 1986 .

[25]  P. Guillaume,et al.  A robust singular value decomposition for damage detection under changing operating conditions and structural uncertainties , 2005 .

[26]  Jyrki Kullaa,et al.  Detection, identification, and quantification of sensor fault in a sensor network , 2013 .

[27]  J. Kullaa,et al.  Bayesian virtual sensing in structural dynamics , 2019, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing.

[28]  Sami F. Masri,et al.  Multivariate Statistical Analysis for Detection and Identification of Faulty Sensors Using Latent Variable Methods , 2008 .

[29]  S. Alampalli,et al.  Influence of in-service environment on modal parameters , 1998 .

[30]  Anders Brandt,et al.  Noise and Vibration Analysis: Signal Analysis and Experimental Procedures , 2011 .

[31]  Gaëtan Kerschen,et al.  Sensor validation using principal component analysis , 2005 .

[32]  R. Clough,et al.  Dynamics Of Structures , 1975 .

[33]  Jyrki Kullaa,et al.  Structural Health Monitoring under Nonlinear Environmental or Operational Influences , 2014 .

[34]  Gaëtan Kerschen,et al.  Structural damage diagnosis under varying environmental conditions—Part I: A linear analysis , 2005 .

[35]  L. Scharf,et al.  Statistical Signal Processing: Detection, Estimation, and Time Series Analysis , 1991 .

[36]  Guido De Roeck,et al.  EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON DYNAMIC SYSTEM PARAMETERS OF A HIGHWAY BRIDGE , 1997 .