Structural damage identification built on a response surface model and the flexibility matrix

Abstract The present work is concerned with the inverse problem of structural damage identification. The damage state of the structure is continuously described by a cohesion field, spatially discretized by the finite element method, and a response surface model (RSM) is considered to provide a polynomial relation between the nodal cohesion parameters and elements of the flexibility matrix of the system. Here, the inverse problem of damage identification is posed as an optimization one, where the objective is to minimize, with respect to the nodal cohesion parameters, the squared norm of the difference between an experimental response vector, composed with elements of the flexibility matrix obtained from a modal test on the supposed damaged structure, and the corresponding one predicted by a RSM. The Particle Swarm Optimization method was considered for solving the resulting inverse problem of damage identification. A simply supported Euler-Bernoulli beam, with three different damage scenarios and the synthetic experimental mode shapes corrupted with two different levels of noise, was considered in the numerical assessment of the proposed damage identification approach. The numerical results show that the proposed approach, built on a RSM of the flexibility matrix, presented results comparable with those obtained with the approach built on the FEM of the structure and it also presented an extremely higher computational performance.

[1]  Tshilidzi Marwala,et al.  Probabilistic Finite Element Model Updating Using Bayesian Statistics: Applications to Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering , 2016 .

[2]  K. Shankar,et al.  System identification of a composite plate using hybrid response surface methodology and particle swarm optimization in time domain , 2014 .

[3]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[4]  C. M. Mota Soares,et al.  Structural Damage Identification: A Survey , 2008 .

[5]  Sara Casciati,et al.  Response Surface Models to Detect and Localize Distributed Cracks in a Complex Continuum , 2010 .

[6]  Christian Cremona,et al.  Assessment of vibration-based damage identification techniques , 2006 .

[7]  Guido De Roeck,et al.  The Local Flexibility method for Vibration-based damage localization and quantification , 2008 .

[8]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Particle swarm optimization , 1995, Swarm Intelligence.

[9]  Paulo B. Lourenço,et al.  Damage identification on arched masonry structures using ambient and random impact vibrations , 2010 .

[10]  Richard S. Pappa,et al.  Large Modal Survey Testing Using the Ibrahim Time Domain Identification Technique , 1982 .

[11]  Leonardo Tavares Stutz,et al.  The Differential Evolution method applied to continuum damage identification via flexibility matrix , 2015 .

[12]  Guido De Roeck,et al.  Dealing with uncertainty in model updating for damage assessment: A review , 2015 .

[13]  Ricardo Perera,et al.  Damage identification by response surface based model updating using D-optimal design , 2011 .

[14]  Shamim N. Pakzad,et al.  Generalized Response Surface Model Updating Using Time Domain Data , 2014 .

[15]  Tshilidzi Marwala,et al.  Finite Element Model Updating Using Computational Intelligence Techniques: Applications to Structural Dynamics , 2010 .

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

[17]  J. Reddy.  An introduction to the finite element method , 1989 .

[18]  Ulrich Fuellekrug,et al.  Computation of real normal modes from complex eigenvectors , 2008 .

[19]  Qiao Li,et al.  A novel finite element model updating method based on substructure and response surface model , 2015 .

[20]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics , 1995 .

[21]  A. Tomaszewska.  Influence of statistical errors on damage detection based on structural flexibility and mode shape curvature , 2010 .

[22]  Q. Huang,et al.  FRF-based structural damage detection of controlled buildings with podium structures: Experimental investigation , 2014 .

[23]  Hyung-Jo Jung,et al.  Sequential surrogate modeling for efficient finite element model updating , 2016 .

[24]  Richard W. Longman,et al.  Constructing Second-Order Models of Mechanical Systems from Identified State Space Realizations. Part I: Theoretical Discussions , 2003 .

[25]  V. Debut,et al.  On using the Hilbert transform for blind identification of complex modes: A practical approach , 2018 .

[26]  Steffen Marburg,et al.  A precise non-destructive damage identification technique of long and slender structures based on modal data , 2016 .

[27]  X. Y. Li,et al.  Matrix of the covariance of covariance of acceleration responses for damage detection from ambient vibration measurements , 2010 .

[28]  Wei-Xin Ren,et al.  Finite element model updating in structural dynamics by using the response surface method , 2010 .

[29]  M. S. Khots,et al.  D-optimal designs , 1995 .

[30]  Norhisham Bakhary,et al.  Response surface methodology for damage detection using frequency and mode shape , 2018 .

[31]  Zhouhong Zong,et al.  Finite element model validation of bridge based on structural health monitoring—Part I: Response surface-based finite element model updating , 2015 .

[32]  K. Shankar,et al.  Joint damage identification using Improved Radial Basis Function (IRBF) networks in frequency and time domain , 2013, Appl. Soft Comput..

[33]  J. Juang.  Applied system identification , 1994 .

[34]  Yue Shi,et al.  A modified particle swarm optimizer , 1998, 1998 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation Proceedings. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Cat. No.98TH8360).

[35]  D. Knupp,et al.  Structural damage identification via time domain response and Markov Chain Monte Carlo method , 2017 .

[36]  Hamid Bahai,et al.  Experimental identification of closely spaced modes using NExT-ERA , 2018 .