Comparisons between Modal-Parameter-Based and Flexibility-Based Damage Identification Methods

Modal parameters and modal flexibility obtained from the modal experiment have been used for damage identification in frequency domain. These two methods are compared in this paper numerically and experimentally. The optimization objective function of the former method is a weighted function of the frequency and mode shape residues, in which different weights can be assigned to the frequencies and mode shapes so that their degrees of accuracy can be taken into account. The optimization objective function of the latter method is the modal flexibility residue. Based on the same modal data, the two methods are compared from different aspects, including the damage configurations and uncertainties in the modal data. Results show that using the modal parameters directly can detect damage more accurately and reliably than using the modal flexibility.

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

[2]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  A summary review of vibration-based damage identification methods , 1998 .

[3]  E. Parloo,et al.  DAMAGE ASSESSMENT USING MODE SHAPE SENSITIVITIES , 2003 .

[4]  L. D. Peterson,et al.  Health monitoring of aircraft structures using experimental flexibility matrices , 1996 .

[5]  Hong Hao,et al.  Statistical damage identification of structures with frequency changes , 2003 .

[6]  G. D. Jeong,et al.  Identification of Stiffness Reductions Using Natural Frequencies , 1995 .

[7]  Nuno M. M. Maia,et al.  Theoretical and Experimental Modal Analysis , 1997 .

[8]  Jean-Claude Golinval,et al.  Structural damage localization by combining flexibility and stiffness methods , 2005 .

[9]  Ephrahim Garcia,et al.  Structural Damage Identification: A Probabilistic Approach , 1998 .

[10]  Z. Qiu,et al.  Interval Analysis Method for Damage Identification of Structures , 2010 .

[11]  H. Lee,et al.  STATISTICAL DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF FRAMED STRUCTURES FROM STATIC RESPONSES , 2000 .

[12]  Hong Hao,et al.  Damage identification of structures with uncertain frequency and mode shape data , 2002 .

[13]  Lei Wang,et al.  Interval Analysis Method for Structural Damage Identification Based on Multiple Load Cases , 2012 .

[14]  Wei-Xin Ren,et al.  Damage detection by finite element model updating using modal flexibility residual , 2006 .

[15]  Hong Hao,et al.  Vibration-based Damage Detection of Structures by Genetic Algorithm , 2002 .

[16]  Wei-Xin Ren,et al.  Structural Finite Element Model Updating Using Ambient Vibration Test Results , 2005 .

[17]  Jm M. Ko,et al.  An improved perturbation method for stochastic finite element model updating , 2008 .

[18]  Cuiping Li,et al.  Hybrid approach for damage detection in flexible structures , 1995 .

[19]  Renzo Rosso,et al.  Statistics, Probability and Reliability for Civil and Environmental Engineers , 1997 .

[20]  Thomas F. Coleman,et al.  An Interior Trust Region Approach for Nonlinear Minimization Subject to Bounds , 1993, SIAM J. Optim..

[21]  N. T. Kottegoda,et al.  Probability, Statistics, and Reliability for Civil and Environmental Engineers , 1997 .

[22]  Mark Richardson,et al.  PARAMETER ESTIMATION FROM FREQUENCY RESPONSE MEASUREMENTS USING RATIONAL FRACTION POLYNOMIALS (TWENTY YEARS OF PROGRESS) , 1982 .

[23]  Robert D. Adams,et al.  The location of defects in structures from measurements of natural frequencies , 1979 .