journal article·2025-09-20

Damage identification and localization of pultruded FRP composites based on convolutional recurrent neural network and metaheuristic intelligent algorithms

Xinquan Chang, Xin Wang, Zhili He, Lining Ding, Kang Yuan, Mohammad Noori, Jialin Liu, Mohamedel Mujtaba, Zhishen Wu

Polymer Composites· Volume 46· Issue S2
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Fiber‐reinforced polymer (FRP) tendons are preferred in civil engineering for their lightweight properties, high strength, corrosion resistance, and electrical insulation. However, initial defects that arise during material preparation can adversely affect the mechanical performance and service life of structures. Local identification technology is inadequate for FRP products with variable thickness cross‐sections, especially FRP tendons, resulting in low detection efficiency. This article presents an innovative inverse problem‐solving framework aimed at simultaneously identifying the location and severity of defects in FRP tendons through frequency change rates. A convolutional recurrent neural network (CRNN) model was developed to establish the mapping between frequency change rates and associated damage information, including location and severity. The CRNN model's database was generated from finite element models (FEM), which were validated against Euler beam vibration theory, demonstrating an absolute error of less than 1%. The CRNN model was trained using this database and optimized through data matrix reconstruction, model refinement, and dilated convolution, achieving a mean absolute error (Mae) of 0.115% for predicting frequency change rate. This performance significantly surpassed that of CNN (0.318%), MLP (0.274%), and LSTM (0.334%) models. The CRNN model served as the surrogate model for the inverse problem, which was addressed using the Slime Mold Algorithm (SMA) model. The prediction error for frequency change rates with SMA model was under 0.5%, notably better than that of FEM. Consequently, this framework simultaneously identifies defects' location and severity in FRP tendons, offering valuable insights for the engineering applications of various FRP products. Highlights CRNN model achieved 0.115% MAE in frequency rates, 41.6% better than MLP. Optimized SMA identified FRP damage location with 97.8% accuracy. Hammering method effectively excited the first 8 frequencies of FRP tendons. Experimental and theoretical errors in FEM and Euler analysis stayed below 1%.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Concrete Corrosion and Durability

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Key Laboratory of C & PC Structures Ministry of Education National and Local Unified Engineering Research Center for Basalt Fiber Production and Application Technology, Southeast University Nanjing China

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, HKSAR Hong Kong China

School of Civil Engineering Nanjing Forestry University Nanjing China

First design and research institute Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design Institute (Group) Co., Ltd

Department of Mechanical Engineering California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo California USA

School of Civil Engineering University of Leeds Leeds UK

School of Civil Engineering Henan University of Technology Zhengzhou China

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China · Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

References (51)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.10.01610.1016/j.compositesb.2011.10.016 ↗
2. Anchoring and stressing methods for prestressed FRP plates: state‐of‐the‐art review10.1177/07316844241258864 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.03410.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.034 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.10822810.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108228 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.05.07810.1016/j.compstruct.2018.05.078 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2024.11849210.1016/j.compstruct.2024.118492 ↗
7. 10.1002/pc.2808310.1002/pc.28083 ↗
8. 10.1016/0010-4361(95)96808-J10.1016/0010-4361(95)96808-J ↗
9. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.07.11810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.07.118 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.measurement.2025.11691110.1016/j.measurement.2025.116911 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11404010.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114040 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2015.04.01310.1016/j.polymertesting.2015.04.013 ↗
13. Damage characterisation of GFRP composites based on clustering acoustic emission events utilizing single‐failure‐cause tests as reference
14. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10746910.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107469 ↗
15. 10.1002/pc.2783410.1002/pc.27834 ↗
16. 10.1016/S1359-8368(99)00067-010.1016/S1359-8368(99)00067-0 ↗
17. 10.1016/S1359-8368(99)00076-110.1016/S1359-8368(99)00076-1 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.tws.2024.11237410.1016/j.tws.2024.112374 ↗
19. 10.1002/pc.2809610.1002/pc.28096 ↗
20. 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1995_209_238_0210.1243/PIME_PROC_1995_209_238_02 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.tws.2023.11132310.1016/j.tws.2023.111323 ↗
22. 10.1243/JMES_JOUR_1978_020_016_0210.1243/JMES_JOUR_1978_020_016_02 ↗
23. 10.1243/03093247V14204910.1243/03093247V142049 ↗
24. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:10(3042)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:10(3042) ↗
25. 10.1109/TMI.2016.262463410.1109/TMI.2016.2624634 ↗
26. 10.1016/S0141-0296(96)00149-610.1016/S0141-0296(96)00149-6 ↗
27. 10.1002/pc.2725410.1002/pc.27254 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.09.02510.1016/j.compstruct.2013.09.025 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2021.10271910.1016/j.mtcomm.2021.102719 ↗
30. 10.1002/pc.2841810.1002/pc.28418 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2023.11109910.1016/j.compositesb.2023.111099 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2024.13017510.1016/j.matchemphys.2024.130175 ↗
33. 10.1002/pc.2818010.1002/pc.28180 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11429010.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114290 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.measurement.2024.11491210.1016/j.measurement.2024.114912 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.autcon.2024.10535410.1016/j.autcon.2024.105354 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.inffus.2024.10265410.1016/j.inffus.2024.102654 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10928210.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109282 ↗
39. 10.1617/s11527-025-02607-y10.1617/s11527-025-02607-y ↗
40. 10.1557/s43577-020-00006-y10.1557/s43577-020-00006-y ↗
41. 10.1073/pnas.210272111810.1073/pnas.2102721118 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2024.11135310.1016/j.compositesb.2024.111353 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.11525110.1016/j.compstruct.2022.115251 ↗
44. 10.1016/S1270-9638(99)80044-310.1016/S1270-9638(99)80044-3 ↗
45. 10.1006/jsvi.2001.412610.1006/jsvi.2001.4126 ↗
46. 10.1299/jmmp.4.78110.1299/jmmp.4.781 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12125310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121253 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2024.10946110.1016/j.ijmecsci.2024.109461 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.matcom.2022.02.03010.1016/j.matcom.2022.02.030 ↗
50. Calculating static deflection and natural frequency of stepped cantilever beam using modified Rayleigh method
51. 10.1016/j.future.2020.03.05510.1016/j.future.2020.03.055 ↗