Optimization of Sensor Positions and Orientations for Multiple Load Case Scenarios
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper focuses on optimizing sensor placement in structures for load monitoring applications. Such applications rely on sensor data to track changes in the structure. Monitoring accuracy relies on proper sensor placement. The goal is to maximize load monitoring accuracy under multiple loading scenarios while the number of sensors is kept smaller than the number of load cases. Building on prior work in which machine learning models predicted loads using only sensor readings without information on load location, this study continues that approach. It demonstrates that prediction models perform better when sensor networks are optimized. The novelty lies in a newly formulated objective function, allowing for optimization of sensor number, positions, and orientations across multiple load cases and measurement types. The goal is to minimize the differences between maximal responses of the structure and detected responses by the sensors (for all possible load cases). The method is validated on a numerical model of a composite structure with 1–3 sensors under seven different load cases. Load predictions from sensors in optimized locations are compared to predictions from measurements of randomly positioned sensors. Statistical comparison proved that the developed methods and algorithms allow us to significantly reduce the prediction errors.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Vibration and Dynamic Analysis · Hydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computational Mechanics and Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
Funding
‘The Excellence Initiative—Research University’ program at the Silesian University of Technology, 2025 · statutory subsidy of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering of the Silesian University of Technology
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. Hassani, S., and Dackermann, U. (2023). A Systematic Review of Optimization Algorithms for Structural Health Monitoring and Optimal Sensor Placement. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23063293 ↗
2. On sensor optimisation for structural health monitoring robust to environmental variations10.5194/wes-6-1107-2021 ↗
3. Optimal sensor placement for bridge structural health monitoring: Integration of physics-based models with data-driven approaches10.1016/j.prostr.2024.09.125 ↗
4. Burczyński, T., Kuś, W., Beluch, W., Długosz, A., Poteralski, A., and Szczepanik, M. (2020). Intelligent Computing in Optimal Design, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-34161-9 ↗
5. Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures10.2514/3.20635 ↗
6. Iterative optimal sensor placement for adaptive structural identification using mobile sensors: Numerical application to a footbridge10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110556 ↗
7. Wang, Y., Chen, Y., Yao, Y., and Ou, J. (2023). Advancements in optimal sensor placement for enhanced structural health monitoring: Current insights and future prospects. Buildings, 13.10.3390/buildings13123129 ↗
8. Optimal Sensor Placement for Health Monitoring of High-Rise Structure Based on Genetic Algorithm10.1155/2011/395101 ↗
9. Sensor Layout Design for Structural Health Monitoring10.28991/CEJ-2024-010-12-011 ↗
10. Stiffness Separation Method for Reducing Calculation Time of Truss Structure Damage Identification10.1155/2024/5171542 ↗
11. Partial-Model-Based Damage Identification of Long-Span Steel Truss Bridge Based on Stiffness Separation Method10.1155/2024/5530300 ↗
12. Optimal sensor placements using modified Fisher information matrix and effective information algorithm10.1177/15501477211023022 ↗
13. A multiobjective sensor placement optimization for SHM systems considering Fisher information matrix and mode shape interpolation10.1007/s00366-018-0613-7 ↗
14. Multi-objective optimization for sensor placement: An integrated combinatorial approach with reduced order model and Gaussian process10.1016/j.measurement.2021.110370 ↗
15. Optimal sensor placement using machine learning10.1016/j.compfluid.2017.10.002 ↗
16. Cross, E.J., Gibson, S.J., Jones, M.R., Pitchforth, D.J., Zhang, S., and Rogers, T.J. (2022). Physics-informed machine learning for structural health monitoring. Structural Health Monitoring Based on Data Science Techniques, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-81716-9_17 ↗
17. Barthorpe, R.J., and Worden, K. (2020). Emerging Trends in Optimal Structural Health Monitoring System Design: From Sensor Placement to System Evaluation. J. Sens. Actuator Netw., 9.10.3390/jsan9030031 ↗
18. Mucha, W., Kuś, W., Viana, J.C., and Nunes, J.P. (2020). Operational Load Monitoring of a Composite Panel Using Artificial Neural Networks. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20092534 ↗
19. A data-driven sensor placement strategy for reconstruction of mode shapes by using recurrent Gaussian process regression10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.115998 ↗
20. Real-time operational load monitoring of a composite aerostructure using FPGA-based computing system
21. One-year operational modal analysis of a steel bridge from high-resolution macrostrain monitoring: Influence of temperature vs10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.107951 ↗
22. Effects of operational loads on buried water pipes using field tests10.1016/j.tust.2022.104463 ↗
23. The identification of operational cycles in the monitoring systems of underground vehicles10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107111 ↗
24. Mucha, W., Kuś, W., and Jiregna, I.T. (2025, January 12–14). Numerical Optimization of Strain Sensor Placement for Load Monitoring in 2D Structures. Proceedings of the 31st International Conference Engineering Mechanics 2025, Medlov, Czech Republic.10.21495/em2025-133 ↗
25. Ghasemzadeh, M., and Kefal, A. (2022). Sensor placement optimization for shape sensing of plates and shells using genetic algorithm and inverse finite element method. Sensors, 22.10.3390/s22239252 ↗
26. Sensor placement optimization for critical-grid coverage problem of indoor positioning10.1177/1550147720979922 ↗
27. Automatic sensor orientation using horizontal and vertical line feature constraints10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2019.02.011 ↗
28. A physics-driven sensor placement optimization methodology for temperature field reconstruction10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2024.124476 ↗
29. (2025, May 09). Workbench User’s Guide. Available online: https://ansyshelp.ansys.com/public/account/secured?returnurl=/Views/Secured/corp/v242/en/wb2_help/wb2_help.html.
30. Measurements Group Inc (1983). Errors Due to Transverse Sensitivity in Strain Gages. Exp. Tech., 7, 30–35.10.1111/j.1747-1567.1983.tb01667.x ↗
31. Omega Engineering (1999). Practical Strain Gage Measurements, Omega Engineering Inc.
32. Safieh, N. (2024). A Systematic Approach to Evaluate Uncertainty of a Static Strain Measurement. [Ph.D. Thesis, Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg].
33. González-Gallego, M., Terroba Ramírez, F., Martínez-Vicente, J.L., González del Val, M., López-Cela, J.J., and Frövel, M. (2024). Fiber Bragg Gratings Sensor Strain–Optic Behavior with Different Polymeric Coatings Subjected to Transverse Strain. Polymers, 16.10.20944/preprints202403.0137.v1 ↗
34. Computational methodologies for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring: A review10.1177/1475921719877579 ↗
35. Mucha, W. (2020). Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms for Structure State Prediction in Operational Load Monitoring. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20247087 ↗