Table of Contents


    Topic review

    Structural Health Monitoring

    Subjects: Civil Engineering
    View times: 274

    Definition

    Recent advances in sensor technologies and data acquisition systems opened up the era of big data in the field of structural health monitoring (SHM). Data-driven methods based on statistical pattern recognition provide outstanding opportunities to implement a long-term SHM strategy, by exploiting measured vibration data. However, their main limitation, due to big data or high-dimensional features, is linked to the complex and time-consuming procedures for feature extraction and/or statistical decision-making. To cope with this issue, in this article we propose a strategy based on autoregressive moving average (ARMA) modeling for feature extraction, and on an innovative hybrid divergence-based method for feature classification. Data relevant to a cable-stayed bridge are accounted for to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed method. The results show that the offered hybrid divergence-based method, in conjunction with ARMA modeling, succeeds in detecting damage in cases strongly characterized by big data.

    1. Introduction

    Civil structures are currently facing issues related to aging, material deterioration, excessive loading conditions unexpected at the design stage, inappropriate usage, environmental actions and natural hazards. Under such circumstances, they may get affected by serious damages which threaten their structural performance and safety. To avoid irreparable events and guarantee the serviceability of the structures, structural health monitoring (SHM) represents a practical tool to evaluate the structural conditions both at global and local levels [1][2][3]. To achieve this objective, relatively dense sensor networks need to be designed and data acquisition must be exploited to continuously collect information in terms of, e.g., structural vibrations [4][5][6][7][8][9][10].

    2. Result

    Recent advances in sensor and information technologies have opened up the possibility of exploiting big data, in order to shift the focus from sensing and instrumentation to the analysis and interpretation of sensor network outcomes via data-driven methods [11]. Big data is a term associated with a large volume of high-dimensional data, whose size is beyond the ability of commonly used software and hardware to analyze the samples in a limited amount of time [12]. The concept of big data has received remarkable attention when dealing with complex engineering problems, also within the civil engineering community [13][14][15]. Big data may arise for SHM in the case of long-term monitoring strategies, use of dense sensor networks, exploitation of multiple dynamic tests on the structure and high sampling rates [16].[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39]

    Big data analytics for SHM is a relatively new research topic. In [16], challenges related to big data were discussed on the basis of their characteristics like variety (type and nature of data coming from different sources), volume (size and quantity of stored data), velocity (speed at which the data are processed) and complexity (related to uncertainties and inaccuracies in them). In [17], the computational sensitivity of common SHM procedures was assessed in relation to system identification and damage detection, in the case of large volumes of vibration measurements to be processed. A machine learning algorithm was proposed in [11], based on cross-correlation and robust regression analyses, for processing data collected from the mechanical components of movable bridges. A method was also offered in [18], based on the statistical pattern recognition paradigm to include the use of multivariate analysis, sensor data fusion and machine learning for damage detection from a large volume of data acquired from distributed piezoelectric sensors. Damage detection using distributed parallel processing was implemented in [12], with the aim of addressing the issues linked to the volume and variety of the data. Big data analytics were carried out in [19] for the condition evaluation of highway bridges, by roughly considering one million data samples obtained from the National Bridge Inventory. In [20], the focus was on structural damage detection and localization by handling big data through an iterative spatial compressive sensing algorithm.

    The processing of data in long-term SHM may be a complex and time-consuming procedure, often preventing the monitoring system to work in real-time. Further to that, a large volume of high-dimensional data (e.g., the acceleration time histories acquired by a dense sensor network) needs a vast storage space, detrimentally affecting the performance of the software used for data analytics [21]. What precedes must also deal with issues related to uncertainties such as noise, environmental and operational variability due to temperature fluctuation, humidity variation and mass changes caused by traffic loads [18][22][23]. For a long-term SHM program, the measurement of vibrations takes place under different environmental and operational conditions, leading in some cases to changes in the structural response similar to those caused by damage, and hence providing false alarms [22].

    Data-driven methods for SHM have been inspired by the theory of statistical pattern recognition [23][24][25][26][27]. These methods consist of two main steps: extraction of damage-sensitive features from periodically spaced vibration measurements over a period of time, and analysis of these features via statistical approaches, to assess the current state of the structure. The reason to move to damage-sensitive features lies in the fact that the direct use of raw vibration data may not be sufficiently informative [11]. As vibration data are acquired in time, time series analysis provides an efficient tool for feature extraction [28][29][30][31][32].

    The analysis of the damage-sensitive features for damage detection is usually carried out via statistical techniques. In fact, the definition of a meaningful relationship between damage and the features extracted from the raw vibration data, on the basis of physical laws or numerical models of the structure, proves difficult if not impossible [25]. The analysis of damage-sensitive features is usually known as statistical decision-making or feature classification (see [18][22][23][29][33][34][35]). Within SHM, this process aims to compare the features relevant to two different structural conditions, one of which is assumed normal or undamaged, and then make a decision about the current state of the structure, which may be either undamaged or damaged. From a statistical viewpoint, distance metrics for feature classification have to provide a measure of the discrepancies between two sets of data samples, handled as random variables, in terms of, e.g., their probability distributions [36]. There exist effective univariate and multivariate distance metrics that can be adopted in SHM analysis [22][23][25][29][30][31][37][38]; however, their use does not always guarantee an accurate and reliable feature classification, particularly in the case of big data analytics.

    Having considered the above-mentioned limitations, the main objective of this work is to propose a data-driven method for SHM based on statistical pattern recognition in the presence of big data. First, ARMA representations are adopted to model, in the time-domain, the vibration responses, which are assumed to consist of large volumes of high-dimensional data, and reliably extract damage-sensitive features in a low-dimensional space. Second, a hybrid divergence-based method is used to take a decision about damage occurrence. Such a method is a combination of a partition-based Kullback–Leibler divergence (PKLD) and the nearest neighbor (NN) rule, and is, therefore, termed PKLD-NN. It stands as an improvement over a classical hybrid method obtained by combining the Euclidean-squared distance (ESD) and the NN rule (ESD-NN), as proposed in [39]. Furthermore, the PKLD improves the conventional Kullback–Leibler divergence (KLD) in measuring the discrepancy between two sets of time series samples, to enable addressing the main limitations for random samples and coping with high-dimensional features for damage diagnosis. The high detectability of damage and the utility of long-term SHM methods are shown for the proposed PKLD-NN approach, accounting also for ambient vibrations and environmental and/or operational variability conditions. A major strength of the proposed approach is its capability to provide a novelty detection on the basis of the measured data and low-dimensional feature samples, independently of the specific type of damage. Experimental datasets of a large-scale cable-stayed bridge are adopted to verify the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed data-driven method. Through comparison with state-of-the-art techniques, the newly proposed strategy is reported to be highly successful in detecting damage and handling big data.

    The entry is from 10.3390/s20082328

    References

    1. Moughty, J.J.; Casas, J.R. A State of the art review of modal-based damage detection in bridges: Development, challenges, and solutions. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    2. Li, J.; Deng, J.; Xie, W. Damage detection with streamlined structural health monitoring data. Sensors 2015, 15, 8832–8851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    3. Chen, Z.; Zhou, X.; Wang, X.; Dong, L.; Qian, Y. Deployment of a Smart structural health monitoring system for long-span arch bridges: A review and a case study. Sensors 2017, 17, 2151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    4. Feng, M.; Fukuda, Y.; Mizuta, M.; Ozer, E. Citizen Sensors for SHM: Use of accelerometer data from smartphones. Sensors 2015, 15, 2980–2998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    5. Chen, Y.; Xue, X. Advances in the structural health monitoring of bridges using piezoelectric transducers. Sensors 2018, 18, 4312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    6. Capellari, G.; Chatzi, E.; Mariani, S.; Eftekhar Azam, S. Optimal design of sensor networks for damage detection. Procedia Eng. 2017, 199, 1864–1869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    7. Capellari, G.; Chatzi, E.; Mariani, S. Cost-benefit optimization of sensor networks for SHM applications. Proceedings 2018, 2, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    8. Barrias, A.; Casas, J.R.; Villalba, S. A review of distributed optical fiber sensors for civil engineering applications. Sensors 2016, 16, 748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    9. Na, W.S.; Baek, J. A review of the piezoelectric electromechanical impedance based structural health monitoring technique for engineering structures. Sensors 2018, 18, 1307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    10. Capellari, G.; Chatzi, E.; Mariani, S. Structural health monitoring sensor network optimization through bayesian experimental design. ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertain. Eng. Syst. Part A Civ. Eng. 2018, 4, 04018016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    11. Catbas, F.N.; Malekzadeh, M. A machine learning-based algorithm for processing massive data collected from the mechanical components of movable bridges. Autom. Constr. 2016, 72, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    12. Tran, C. Structural-damage detection with big data using parallel computing based on MPSoC. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 2016, 7, 1213–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    13. Kim, B.-S.; Kim, K.-I.; Shah, B.; Chow, F.; Kim, K.H. Wireless sensor networks for big data systems. Sensors 2019, 19, 1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    14. Djedouboum, A.C.; Abba Ari, A.A.; Gueroui, A.M.; Mohamadou, A.; Aliouat, Z. Big data collection in large-scale wireless sensor networks. Sensors 2018, 18, 4474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    15. Syafrudin, M.; Alfian, G.; Fitriyani, N.L.; Rhee, J. Performance analysis of IoT-Based Sensor, big data processing, and machine learning model for real-time monitoring system in automotive manufacturing. Sensors 2018, 18, 2946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    16. Gulgec, N.S.; Shahidi, G.S.; Matarazzo, T.J.; Pakzad, S.N. Current Challenges with BIGDATA Analytics in Structural Health Monitoring. In Structural Health Monitoring & Damage Detection; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; Volume 7, pp. 79–84. [Google Scholar]
    17. Matarazzo, T.J.; Shahidi, S.G.; Chang, M.; Pakzad, S.N. Are today’s SHM procedures suitable for tomorrow’s BIGDATA? In Structural Health Monitoring and Damage Detection; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; Volume 7, pp. 59–65. [Google Scholar]
    18. Vitola, J.; Pozo, F.; Tibaduiza, D.A.; Anaya, M. Distributed piezoelectric sensor system for damage identification in structures subjected to temperature changes. Sensors 2017, 17, 1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    19. Kim, Y.J.; Queiroz, L.B. Big Data for condition evaluation of constructed bridges. Eng. Struct. 2017, 141, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    20. Yao, R.; Pakzad, S.N.; Venkitasubramaniam, P. Compressive sensing based structural damage detection and localization using theoretical and metaheuristic statistics. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2017, 24, e1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    21. Riveiro, B.; DeJong, M.J.; Conde, B. Automated processing of large point clouds for structural health monitoring of masonry arch bridges. Autom. Constr. 2016, 72, 258–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    22. Sarmadi, H.; Karamodin, A. A novel anomaly detection method based on adaptive Mahalanobis-squared distance and one-class kNN rule for structural health monitoring under environmental effects. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 140, 106495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    23. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H.; Karamodin, A. Data-driven damage diagnosis under environmental and operational variability by novel statistical pattern recognition methods. Struct. Health Monit. 2019, 18, 1416–1443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    24. Hu, W.-H.; Tang, D.-H.; Teng, J.; Said, S.; Rohrmann, R.G. Structural health monitoring of a prestressed concrete bridge based on statistical pattern recognition of continuous dynamic measurements over 14 years. Sensors 2018, 18, 4117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    25. Sarmadi, H.; Entezami, A.; Daneshvar Khorram, M. Energy-based damage localization under ambient vibration and non-stationary signals by ensemble empirical mode decomposition and Mahalanobis-squared distance. J. Vib. Control 2019, 1077546319891306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    26. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H.; Mariani, S. Fast unsupervised learning methods for structural health monitoring with large vibration data from dense sensor networks. Struct. Health Monit. 2019, 1475921719894186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    27. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H.; Mariani, S. Low-order feature extraction technique and unsupervised learning for SHM under high-dimensional data. In Proceedings of the MORTech 2019, 5th International Workshop on Reduced Basis, POD and PGD Model Reduction Techniques, Paris, France, 20–22 November 2019; pp. 72–73. [Google Scholar]
    28. Carden, E.P.; Brownjohn, J.M. ARMA modelled time-series classification for Structural Health Monitoring of civil infrastructure. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2008, 22, 295–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    29. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H. An unsupervised learning approach by novel damage indices in structural health monitoring for damage localization and quantification. Struct. Health Monit. 2018, 17, 325–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    30. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H. Structural health monitoring by a new hybrid feature extraction and dynamic time warping methods under ambient vibration and non-stationary signals. Measurement 2019, 134, 548–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    31. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H. Damage localization under ambient excitations and non-stationary vibration signals by a new hybrid algorithm for feature extraction and multivariate distance correlation methods. Struct. Health Monit. 2019, 18, 347–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    32. Entezami, A.; Shariatmadar, H.; Mariani, S. Structural health monitoring for condition assessment using efficient supervised learning techniques. Proceedings 2020, 42, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    33. Vitola, J.; Pozo, F.; Tibaduiza, D.A.; Anaya, M. A sensor data fusion system based on k-nearest neighbor pattern classification for structural health monitoring applications. Sensors 2017, 17, 417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    34. Eftekhar Azam, S.; Rageh, A.; Linzell, D. Damage detection in structural systems utilizing artificial neural networks and proper orthogonal decomposition. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2019, 26, e2288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
    35. Perez, H.; Tah, J.H.M.; Mosavi, A. Deep learning for detecting building defects using convolutional neural networks. Sensors 2019, 19, 3556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    36. Deza, M.M.; Deza, E. Encyclopedia of Distances; Elsevier B.V.: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
    37. Wang, D.; Wang, Q.; Wang, H.; Zhu, H. Experimental study on damage detection in timber specimens based on an electromechanical impedance technique and RMSD-based mahalanobis distance. Sensors 2016, 16, 1765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    38. Kim, B.; Min, C.; Kim, H.; Cho, S.; Oh, J.; Ha, S.-H.; Yi, J.-H. Structural health monitoring with sensor data and cosine similarity for multi-damages. Sensors 2019, 19, 3047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    39. Wang, Q.; Kulkarni, S.R.; Verdú, S. A nearest-neighbor approach to estimating divergence between continuous random vectors. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, Seattle, WA, USA, 9–14 July 2006; pp. 242–246.
    More