Data-driven multivariate algorithms for damage detection and identification: Evaluation and comparison

This article is concerned with the experimental validation of a structural health monitoring methodology for damage detection and identification. Three different data-driven multivariate algorithms are considered here to obtain the baseline pattern. These are based on principal component analysis, independent component analysis and hierarchical non-linear principal component analysis. The contribution of this article is to examine and compare the three proposed algorithms that have been reported as reliable methods for damage detection and identification. The approach is based on a distributed piezoelectric active sensor network for the excitation and detection of structural dynamic responses. A woven multilayered composite plate and a simplified aircraft composite skin panel are used as examples to test the approaches. Data-driven baseline patterns are built when the structure is known to be healthy from wavelet coefficients of the structural dynamic responses. Damage is then simulated by adding masses at different positions of the structures. The data from the structure in different states (damaged or not) are then projected into the different models by each actuator in order to generate the input feature vectors of a self-organizing map from the computed components together with squared prediction error measures. All three methods are shown to be successful in detecting and classifying the simulated damages. At the end, a critical comparison is given in order to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of each method for the damage detection and identification tasks.

[1]  Lei Xu,et al.  Independent component ordering in ICA time series analysis , 2001, Neurocomputing.

[2]  Keith Worden,et al.  An introduction to structural health monitoring , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[3]  S. Qin,et al.  Selection of the Number of Principal Components: The Variance of the Reconstruction Error Criterion with a Comparison to Other Methods† , 1999 .

[4]  Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultat,et al.  Approaches to analyse and interpret biological profile data , 2006 .

[5]  Rune Brincker,et al.  Vibration Based Inspection of Civil Engineering Structures , 1993 .

[6]  Erkki Oja,et al.  Independent Component Analysis , 2001 .

[7]  Luis Eduardo Mujica,et al.  Q-statistic and T2-statistic PCA-based measures for damage assessment in structures , 2011 .

[8]  Michel Verleysen,et al.  Multivariate statistics process control for dimensionality reduction in structural assessment , 2008 .

[9]  Keith Worden,et al.  STRUCTURAL FAULT DETECTION USING A NOVELTY MEASURE , 1997 .

[10]  S. Joe Qin,et al.  Statistical process monitoring: basics and beyond , 2003 .

[11]  Dong Wang,et al.  Probabilistic damage identification based on correlation analysis using guided wave signals in aluminum plates , 2010 .

[12]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Structural Health Monitoring Using Statistical Pattern Recognition Techniques , 2001 .

[13]  Teuvo Kohonen,et al.  Self-Organizing Maps , 2010 .

[14]  Matthias Scholz,et al.  Nonlinear Principal Component Analysis: Neural Network Models and Applications , 2008 .

[15]  Ronald R. Coifman,et al.  Entropy-based algorithms for best basis selection , 1992, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[16]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Novelty detection under changing environmental conditions , 2001, SPIE Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[17]  Bo Han,et al.  Structural Damage Detection by Integrating Independent Component Analysis and Support Vector Machine , 2005, ADMA.

[18]  Theodora Kourti,et al.  Comparing alternative approaches for multivariate statistical analysis of batch process data , 1999 .

[19]  F. Harms,et al.  Luftelektrische und Photometrische beobachtungen während der totalen Sonnenfinsternis vom 30. August 1905, in Palma (Mallorca) , 1906 .

[20]  Stéphane Mallat,et al.  A Theory for Multiresolution Signal Decomposition: The Wavelet Representation , 1989, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[21]  Bo Han,et al.  Structural damage detection by integrating independent component analysis and support vector machine , 2006, Int. J. Syst. Sci..

[22]  Joseph L. Rose,et al.  Ultrasonic Guided Waves in Structural Health Monitoring , 2004 .

[23]  Miguel Ángel TORRES-ARREDONDO,et al.  Impact Monitoring in Smart Structures Based on Gaussian Processes , 2012 .

[24]  E. Oja,et al.  Independent Component Analysis , 2013 .

[25]  Matthias Scholz,et al.  Approaches toanalyse and interpret biological profile data , 2006 .

[26]  J. Macgregor,et al.  Monitoring batch processes using multiway principal component analysis , 1994 .

[27]  Andrei Zinovyev,et al.  Principal Manifolds for Data Visualization and Dimension Reduction , 2007 .

[28]  Michael I. Friswell,et al.  Structural Damage Detection using Independent Component Analysis , 2004 .

[29]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  Automated detection of delamination and disbond from wavefield images obtained using a scanning laser vibrometer , 2011 .

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

[31]  Ricardo Vigário,et al.  Nonlinear PCA: a new hierarchical approach , 2002, ESANN.

[32]  S. Seker,et al.  ICA and wavelet packet decomposition approaches for monitoring the incipient bearing damage in electrical motors , 2008, 2008 4th International IEEE Conference Intelligent Systems.

[33]  W. Staszewski Intelligent signal processing for damage detection in composite materials , 2002 .

[34]  Yuan Li,et al.  Improved Performance of Fault Detection Based on Selection of the Optimal Number of Principal Components , 2009 .

[35]  Esa Alhoniemi,et al.  SOM Toolbox for Matlab 5 , 2000 .

[36]  Luis Eduardo Mujica,et al.  A study of two unsupervised data driven statistical methodologies for detecting and classifying damages in structural health monitoring , 2013 .

[37]  Claus-Peter Fritzen,et al.  A Study of Attenuation and Acoustic Energy Anisotropy of Lamb Waves in Multilayered Anisotropic Media for NDT and SHM applications , 2011 .

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

[39]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Survey on Independent Component Analysis , 1999 .

[40]  Aboelmagd Noureldin,et al.  Wavelet Transform for Structural Health Monitoring: A Compendium of Uses and Features , 2006 .

[41]  Alfredo Güemes,et al.  Structural health monitoring , 2006 .

[42]  Christopher N. K. Mooers,et al.  Performance evaluation of the self‐organizing map for feature extraction , 2006 .

[43]  M. Kramer Nonlinear principal component analysis using autoassociative neural networks , 1991 .

[44]  Keith Worden,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF A STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING METHODOLOGY: PART I. NOVELTY DETECTION ON A LABORATORY STRUCTURE , 2003 .

[45]  Wieslaw J. Staszewski,et al.  Advanced data pre-processing for damage identification based on pattern recognition , 2000, Int. J. Syst. Sci..

[46]  S. Wold,et al.  Multi‐way principal components‐and PLS‐analysis , 1987 .

[47]  K. Worden,et al.  The application of machine learning to structural health monitoring , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[48]  Claus-Peter Fritzen,et al.  Characterization and classification of modes in acoustic emission based on dispersion features and energy distribution analysis , 2012 .

[49]  Abdulhamit Subasi,et al.  Application of adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for epileptic seizure detection using wavelet feature extraction , 2007, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[50]  S. Mallat A wavelet tour of signal processing , 1998 .