Are Today’s SHM Procedures Suitable for Tomorrow’s BIGDATA?

Large SHM datasets often result from special applications such as long-term monitoring, dense sensor arrays, or high sampling rates. Through the development of novel sensing techniques as well as advances in sensing devices and data acquisition technology, it is expected that such large volumes of measurement data become commonplace. In anticipation of datasets magnitudes larger than today’s, it is important to evaluate current SHM processing methods at BIGDATA standards and identify potential limitations within computational procedures. This paper will focus on the processing of large SHM datasets and the computational sensitivity of common SHM procedures. Processing concerns encompass efficiency and scalability of SHM software, particularly the computational sensitivity of common system identification and damage detection algorithms with respect to a large amount of sensors and samples.

[1]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Localized Structural Damage Detection: A Change Point Analysis , 2014, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[2]  K. Law,et al.  Time series-based damage detection and localization algorithm with application to the ASCE benchmark structure , 2006 .

[3]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Modified Natural Excitation Technique for Stochastic Modal Identification , 2013 .

[4]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Statistics based localized damage detection using vibration response , 2014 .

[5]  Keith Worden,et al.  DAMAGE DETECTION USING OUTLIER ANALYSIS , 2000 .

[6]  Ruigen Yao,et al.  Autoregressive statistical pattern recognition algorithms for damage detection in civil structures , 2012 .

[7]  G. De Roeck,et al.  System identification of mechanical structures by a high-order multivariate autoregressive model , 1997 .

[8]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Observer Kalman Filter Identification for Output-Only Systems Using Interactive Structural Modal Identification Toolsuite , 2014 .

[9]  Gyuhae Park,et al.  SHMTools: a new embeddable software package for SHM applications , 2010, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[10]  Sung-Han Sim,et al.  Decentralized Strategies for Monitoring Structures using Wireless Smart Sensor Networks , 2009 .

[11]  J. Tukey,et al.  An algorithm for the machine calculation of complex Fourier series , 1965 .

[12]  T. Matarazzo,et al.  STRIDE for Structural Identification Using Expectation Maximization: Iterative Output-Only Method for Modal Identification , 2016 .

[13]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  Damage diagnosis using time series analysis of vibration signals , 2001 .

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

[15]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Statistical Analysis of Vibration Modes of a Suspension Bridge Using Spatially Dense Wireless Sensor Network , 2009 .

[16]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Structural damage detection and localisation using multivariate regression models and two-sample control statistics , 2015 .

[17]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Localized Damage Detection Algorithm and Implementation on a Large-Scale Steel Beam-to-Column Moment Connection , 2015 .

[18]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Influence of the Autoregressive Model Order on Damage Detection , 2011, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[19]  Thomas G. Carne,et al.  The Natural Excitation Technique (NExT) for modal parameter extraction from operating wind turbines , 1993 .

[20]  Bart De Moor,et al.  N4SID: Subspace algorithms for the identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems , 1994, Autom..