A Multi-Objective DIRECT Algorithm Towards Structural Damage Identification with Limited Dynamic Response Information

A major challenge in Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) is to accurately identify both the location and severity of damage using the dynamic response information acquired. While in theory the vibration-based and impedance-based methods may facilitate damage identification with the assistance of a credible baseline finite element model since the changes of stationary wave responses are used in these methods, the response information is generally limited and the measurements may be heterogeneous, making an inverse analysis using sensitivity matrix difficult. Aiming at fundamental advancement, in this research we cast the damage identification problem into an optimization problem where possible changes of finite element properties due to damage occurrence are treated as unknowns. We employ the multiple damage location assurance criterion (MDLAC), which characterizes the relation between measurements and predictions (under sampled elemental property changes), as the vector-form objective function. We then develop an enhanced, multi-objective version of the DIRECT approach to solve the optimization problem. The underlying idea of the multi-objective DIRECT approach is to branch and bound the unknown parametric space to converge to a set of optimal solutions. A new sampling scheme is established, which significantly increases the efficiency in minimizing the error between measurements and predictions. The enhanced DIRECT algorithm is particularly suitable to solving for unknowns that are sparse, as in practical situations structural damage affect only a small number of finite elements. A number of test cases using vibration response information are executed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the new approach.

[1]  Sundaram Suresh,et al.  Dividing rectangles attack multi-objective optimization , 2016, 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[2]  Venu Gopal Madhav Annamdas,et al.  Electromechanical impedance of piezoelectric transducers for monitoring metallic and non-metallic structures: A review of wired, wireless and energy-harvesting methods , 2013 .

[3]  Shiyu Zhou,et al.  Fault identification using piezoelectric impedance measurement and model-based intelligent inference with pre-screening , 2017 .

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

[5]  Qi Shuai,et al.  Structural damage identification using piezoelectric impedance measurement with sparse inverse analysis , 2017, 1708.02968.

[6]  S. S. Law,et al.  DAMAGE LOCALIZATION BY DIRECTLY USING INCOMPLETE MODE SHAPES. TECHNICAL NOTE , 2000 .

[7]  Rong-Song He,et al.  Damage detection by an adaptive real-parameter simulated annealing genetic algorithm , 2006 .

[8]  S. M. Seyedpoor,et al.  Structural damage detection using an efficient correlation-based index and a modified genetic algorithm , 2011, Math. Comput. Model..

[9]  E. J. Williams,et al.  STRUCTURAL DAMAGE DETECTION BY A SENSITIVITY AND STATISTICAL-BASED METHOD , 1998 .

[10]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[11]  Damodar Maity,et al.  Damage assessment of structures from changes in natural frequencies using genetic algorithm , 2005 .

[12]  José Elias Laier,et al.  Localising and quantifying damage by means of a multi-chromosome genetic algorithm , 2012, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[13]  Jiong Tang,et al.  An enhanced frequency-shift-based damage identification method using tunable piezoelectric transducer circuitry , 2006 .

[14]  Pizhong Qiao,et al.  Vibration-based Damage Identification Methods: A Review and Comparative Study , 2011 .

[15]  C. D. Perttunen,et al.  Lipschitzian optimization without the Lipschitz constant , 1993 .

[16]  Tomoyuki Hiroyasu,et al.  Examination of multi-objective optimization method for global search using DIRECT and GA , 2008, 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence).

[17]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Comparative study of damage identification algorithms applied to a bridge: II. Numerical study , 1998 .

[18]  S. M. Seyedpoor A two stage method for structural damage detection using a modal strain energy based index and particle swarm optimization , 2012 .

[19]  Zhengliang Li,et al.  A two-stage method to identify structural damage sites and extents by using evidence theory and micro-search genetic algorithm , 2009 .

[20]  Qi Shuai,et al.  Structural damage identification with multi-objective DIRECT algorithm using natural frequencies and single mode shape , 2017, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[21]  Daniel E. Finkel,et al.  Global optimization with the direct algorithm , 2005 .

[22]  T. Michaels,et al.  Guided wave signal processing and image fusion for in situ damage localization in plates , 2007 .

[23]  B. Shubert A Sequential Method Seeking the Global Maximum of a Function , 1972 .

[24]  H. West,et al.  Eigenvalues for Beam‐Columns on Elastic Supports , 1984 .

[25]  Norris Stubbs,et al.  Crack detection in beam-type structures using frequency data , 2003 .

[26]  Robert D. Adams,et al.  A Vibration Technique for Non-Destructively Assessing the Integrity of Structures: , 1978 .

[27]  S. M. Seyedpoor,et al.  An efficient method for structural damage detection using a differential evolution algorithm-based optimisation approach , 2015 .

[28]  K. W. Wang,et al.  An enhanced impedance-based damage identification method using adaptive piezoelectric circuitry , 2014 .

[29]  Abdullah Al-Dujaili,et al.  Hypervolume-Based DIRECT for Multi-Objective Optimisation , 2016, GECCO.

[30]  Qi Shuai,et al.  Structural Damage Identification Using Piezoelectric Impedance Measurement with Sparse Multi-Objective DIRECT , 2017 .

[31]  Pizhong Qiao,et al.  Integrated wavelet transform and its application to vibration mode shapes for the damage detection of beam-type structures , 2008, Smart Materials and Structures.

[32]  DebK.,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm , 2002 .

[33]  Robert X. Gao,et al.  Complex Housing: Modelling and Optimization Using an Improved Multi-Objective Simulated Annealing Algorithm , 2016, Design Automation Conference.

[34]  Norris Stubbs,et al.  Damage identification in beam-type structures: frequency-based method vs mode-shape-based method , 2003 .

[35]  José M. F. Moura,et al.  Data-driven matched field processing for Lamb wave structural health monitoring. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.