Comparative studies of metamodeling and AI-Based techniques in damage detection of structures

Abstract Despite advances in computer capacity, the enormous computational cost of running complex engineering simulations makes it impractical to rely exclusively on simulation for the purpose of structural health monitoring. To cut down the cost, surrogate models, also known as metamodels, are constructed and then used in place of the actual simulation models. In this study, structural damage detection is performed using two approaches. In both cases ten popular metamodeling techniques including Back-Propagation Neural Networks (BPNN), Least Square Support Vector Machines (LS-SVMs), Adaptive Neural-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), Radial Basis Function Neural network (RBFN), Large Margin Nearest Neighbors (LMNN), Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), Gaussian Process (GP), Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline (MARS), Random Forests and Kriging are used and the comparative results are presented. In the first approach, by considering dynamic behavior of a structure as input variables, ten metamodels are constructed, trained and tested to detect the location and severity of damage in civil structures. The variation of running time, mean square error (MSE), number of training and testing data, and other indices for measuring the accuracy in the prediction are defined and calculated in order to inspect advantages as well as the shortcomings of each algorithm. The results indicate that Kriging and LS-SVM models have better performance in predicting the location/severity of damage compared with other methods. In the second approach, after locating precisely the eventual damage of a structure using modal strain energy based index (MSEBI), to efficiently reduce the computational cost of model updating during the optimization process of damage severity detection, the MSEBI of structural elements is evaluated using a properly trained surrogate model. The results indicate that after determining the damage location, the proposed solution method for damage severity detection leads to significant reduction of computational time compared to finite element method. Furthermore, engaging colliding bodies optimization algorithm (CBO) by efficient surrogate model of finite element (FE) model, maintains the acceptable accuracy of damage severity detection.

[1]  Johan A. K. Suykens,et al.  Least Squares Support Vector Machine Classifiers , 1999, Neural Processing Letters.

[2]  Keith Worden,et al.  An Overview of Intelligent Fault Detection in Systems and Structures , 2004 .

[3]  Mannur J. Sundaresan,et al.  A Study of Machine Learning Techniques for Detecting and Classifying Structural Damage , 2015 .

[4]  Kilian Q. Weinberger,et al.  Distance Metric Learning for Large Margin Nearest Neighbor Classification , 2005, NIPS.

[5]  Eiichi Sasaki,et al.  Nonlinear features for damage detection on large civil structures due to earthquakes , 2012 .

[6]  P. Torkzadeh,et al.  Structural optimization with frequency constraints by genetic algorithm using wavelet radial basis function neural network , 2008 .

[7]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  Colliding Bodies Optimization: Extensions and Applications , 2015 .

[8]  Mohammad Reza Ghasemi,et al.  Engineering optimization based on ideal gas molecular movement algorithm , 2016, Engineering with Computers.

[9]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  Review of Metamodeling Techniques in Support of Engineering Design Optimization , 2007 .

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

[11]  Chunming Zhang,et al.  A hybrid data-fusion system using modal data and probabilistic neural network for damage detection , 2011, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[12]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  Colliding bodies optimization: A novel meta-heuristic method , 2014 .

[13]  Slawomir Koziel,et al.  Surrogate-Based Modeling and Optimization , 2013 .

[14]  Chee Kheong Siew,et al.  Extreme learning machine: Theory and applications , 2006, Neurocomputing.

[15]  A. Kaveh,et al.  An improved CSS for damage detection of truss structures using changes in natural frequencies and mode shapes , 2015, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[16]  Mario Guagliano,et al.  Development of an artificial neural network processing technique for the analysis of damage evolution in pultruded composites with acoustic emission , 2014 .

[17]  Farhad Ansari,et al.  Fibre Optic Methods for structural health monitoring , 2009 .

[18]  Yali Amit,et al.  Shape Quantization and Recognition with Randomized Trees , 1997, Neural Computation.

[19]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Colliding Bodies Optimization method for optimum design of truss structures with continuous variables , 2014, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[20]  Sara Casciati,et al.  Potential of Two Metaheuristic Optimization Tools for Damage Localization in Civil Structures , 2017 .

[21]  Hao Wang,et al.  Predicting tunnel convergence using Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline and Artificial Neural Network , 2013 .

[22]  Ronald L. Iman Latin Hypercube Sampling , 2008 .

[23]  Jerome H. Friedman Multivariate adaptive regression splines (with discussion) , 1991 .

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

[25]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  REVIEW OF METAMODELING TECHNIQUES FOR PRODUCT DESIGN WITH COMPUTATION-INTENSIVE PROCESSES , 2011 .

[26]  P. Torkzadeh,et al.  Damage detection of plate-like structures using intelligent surrogate model , 2016 .

[27]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  Colliding Bodies Optimization , 2021, Advances in Metaheuristic Algorithms for Optimal Design of Structures.

[28]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT UTILIZING FOUR METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS , 2015 .

[29]  Tin Kam Ho,et al.  The Random Subspace Method for Constructing Decision Forests , 1998, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[30]  XuanLong Nguyen,et al.  An ELM based predictive control method for HCCI engines , 2016, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[31]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning (GPML) Toolbox , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[32]  P. Torkzadeh,et al.  STRUCTURAL DAMAGE DETECTION BY MODEL UPDATING METHOD BASED ON CASCADE FEED-FORWARD NEURAL NETWORK AS AN EFFICIENT APPROXIMATION MECHANISM , 2014 .

[33]  Saeed Shojaee,et al.  Hybridizing two-stage meta-heuristic optimization model with weighted least squares support vector machine for optimal shape of double-arch dams , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[34]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  Bandwidth, Profile and Wavefront Optimization Using PSO, CBO, ECBO and TWO Algorithms , 2017 .

[35]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Metamodels for Computer-based Engineering Design: Survey and recommendations , 2001, Engineering with Computers.

[36]  P. Torkzadeh,et al.  A machine-learning approach for structural damage detection using least square support vector machine based on a new combinational kernel function , 2016 .

[37]  B. Sudret,et al.  Reliability-based design optimization using kriging surrogates and subset simulation , 2011, 1104.3667.

[38]  Eleni Chatzi,et al.  Metamodeling of dynamic nonlinear structural systems through polynomial chaos NARX models , 2015 .

[39]  Antanas Verikas,et al.  Mining data with random forests: A survey and results of new tests , 2011, Pattern Recognit..

[40]  Charles R. Farrar,et al.  Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning Perspective , 2012 .

[41]  Dawn An,et al.  Practical options for selecting data-driven or physics-based prognostics algorithms with reviews , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[42]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[43]  Horst Baier,et al.  Knowledge-Based Surrogate Modeling in Engineering Design Optimization , 2013 .

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

[45]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 2003, Springer Series in Statistics.

[46]  Shiv O. Prasher,et al.  Comparison of multivariate adaptive regression splines with coupled wavelet transform artificial neural networks for runoff forecasting in Himalayan micro-watersheds with limited data , 2012 .

[47]  Jyh-Shing Roger Jang,et al.  ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system , 1993, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[48]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Two-dimensional colliding bodies algorithm for optimal design of truss structures , 2015, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[49]  A. N. Galybin,et al.  Crack identification in curvilinear beams by using ANN and ANFIS based on natural frequencies and frequency response functions , 2011, Neural Computing and Applications.

[50]  Jack P. C. Kleijnen,et al.  A methodology for fitting and validating metamodels in simulation , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[51]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  COMPUTER CODES FOR COLLIDING BODIES OPTIMIZATION AND ITS ENHANCED VERSION , 2014 .

[52]  H. Abdul Razak,et al.  Modal parameters based structural damage detection using artificial neural networks - a review , 2014 .

[53]  Corinna Cortes,et al.  Support-Vector Networks , 1995, Machine Learning.

[54]  George K. Karagiannidis,et al.  Efficient Machine Learning for Big Data: A Review , 2015, Big Data Res..

[55]  Ioannis G. Tsoulos,et al.  Modifications of real code genetic algorithm for global optimization , 2008, Appl. Math. Comput..

[56]  Hiroshi Mutsuyoshi,et al.  Artificial neural networks for the prediction of shear capacity of steel plate strengthened RC beams , 2004 .