Two Approaches to Structural Damage Identification: Model Updating versus Soft Computing
Source abstract
Abstract
This article presents two approaches for structural damage identification, each based on a different philosophy. The virtual distortion method (VDM) is a model-updating method of damage assessment, utilizing gradient-based optimization techniques to solve the resulting inverse dynamic problem in the time domain. Case-based reasoning (CBR) is a softcomputing method utilizing wavelet transformation for signal processing and neural networks for training a base of damage cases to use for retrieving a similar relevant case. Advantages and drawbacks of each approach are discussed. Successful calibration of a numerical model from experiments has been shown as a sin equa non for the VDM approach. A numerical example of a beam is presented including a demonstration of the complexity of the inverse problem. Qualitative and quantitative comparisons between the two approaches are made.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
SMART-TECH Centre, Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, Swietokrzyska 21, 00-049 Warsaw, Poland
Modal Intervals and Control Engineering Lab, Department of Electronics, Informatics and Automatics, University of Girona, Campus Montilivi, Edifici P-IV, E-17071 Girona, Spain
References (41)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/nme.8710.1002/nme.87 ↗
2. 10.1177/1045389012214536610.1177/10453890122145366 ↗
3. 10.1106/XU88-UW1T-A6AM-X7EA10.1106/XU88-UW1T-A6AM-X7EA ↗
4. 10.1016/S0045-7949(01)00027-X10.1016/S0045-7949(01)00027-X ↗
5. 10.1137/1.978089871972710.1137/1.9780898719727 ↗
6. Ettouney, M. · 78
7. Farrar, C.R. · 764
8. Friswell, M.I. · 201
9. Fritzen, C. P. · 310
10. Fritzen, C.-P. · 185
11. Ho, Y.K. · 1999 · 995
12. Holnicki-Szulc, J. · 1995
13. 10.1177/1045389X0504916910.1177/1045389X05049169 ↗
14. 10.1177/10453890132056032810.1177/104538901320560328 ↗
15. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:7(677)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:7(677) ↗
16. 10.1109/5.5832510.1109/5.58325 ↗
17. Kolakowski, P. · Engineering Transactions · 2004 · 52 · 253
18. Kolakowski, P. · 775
19. 10.1177/1045389X0404227910.1177/1045389X04042279 ↗
20. Kumar, H.S. · 197
21. Leake, D.B. · 1996
22. 10.1006/jsvi.1999.222810.1006/jsvi.1999.2228 ↗
23. 10.1006/mssp.2002.155010.1006/mssp.2002.1550 ↗
24. Mallat, S. · 1999
25. 10.1088/0964-1726/13/2/00310.1088/0964-1726/13/2/003 ↗
26. 10.1106/2URV-D0HY-0QLA-HAWH10.1106/2URV-D0HY-0QLA-HAWH ↗
27. Mujica, L.E. · 591
28. Muravin, G. · 2000
29. Natke, H.G.
30. 10.1109/34.74573910.1109/34.745739 ↗
31. 10.1007/BFb003045910.1007/BFb0030459 ↗
32. Rose, J.L. · 1999
33. 10.1106/10453890203090410.1106/104538902030904 ↗
34. Staszewski, W.J. · 2003 · 117
35. 10.1016/j.jsv.2003.10.04110.1016/j.jsv.2003.10.041 ↗
36. 10.1117/12.38313610.1117/12.383136 ↗
37. Williams, E.J. · 256
38. Worden, K. · 35
39. Yang, S.M. · 1999 · 871
40. 10.1016/S0263-8223(03)00023-010.1016/S0263-8223(03)00023-0 ↗
41. Zhang, L.