Data level fusion of acoustic emission sensors using deep learning
Source abstract
Abstract
The acoustic emission (AE) technique is commonly utilized for identifying source mechanisms and material damage. In applications requiring numerous sensors and limited detection areas, achieving significant cost savings, weight reduction, and miniaturization of AE sensors is crucial. This prevents excessive weight burdens on structures while minimizing interference with structural integrity. Thin Piezoelectric Wafer Active Sensors (PWAS), compared to conventional commercially available sensors, offer a miniature, lightweight, and affordable alternative. The low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of PWAS sensors and their limited effectiveness in monitoring thick structures result in the decreased reliability of a single classical PWAS sensor for damage detection. This research aims to enhance the functionality of PWAS in AE applications by employing multiple thin PWAS and performing a data-level fusion of their outputs. To achieve this, as a first step, the selection of the optimal PWAS is performed and a configuration is designed for multiple sensors. Pencil break lead (PBL) tests were performed to investigate the compatibility between selected PWAS and traditional WSα and R15α sensors. The responses of all sensors from different AE sources were compared in both the time and frequency domains. After that, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) combined with principal component analysis (PCA) are proposed for signal processing and data fusion. The signals generated by the PBL tests were used for network training and evaluation. This approach, developed by the authors, fuses the signals from multiple PWAS and reconstructs the signals obtained from conventional bulky AE sensors for damage detection. Three CNNs with different architectures were built and tested to optimize the network. It is found that the proposed methodology can effectively reconstruct and identify the PBL signals with high precision. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using a deep-learning-based method for AE monitoring using PWAS for real engineering structures.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Geophysical Methods and Applications · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College London, London, UK
References (60)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/wics.10110.1002/wics.101 ↗
2. 10.3390/electronics803029210.3390/electronics8030292 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2017.03.04710.1016/j.ymssp.2017.03.047 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10708310.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107083 ↗
5. 10.1177/1045389X1773093010.1177/1045389X17730930 ↗
6. 10.3390/s14112054310.3390/s141120543 ↗
7. 10.1177/1475921721100712710.1177/14759217211007127 ↗
8. 10.3390/cmd201000110.3390/cmd2010001 ↗
9. 10.1007/s40857-021-00219-410.1007/s40857-021-00219-4 ↗
10. 10.5772/4994110.5772/49941 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.10862410.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.108624 ↗
12. 10.1177/147592172097694110.1177/1475921720976941 ↗
13. Cheng L · 2022 · 619
14. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12170610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121706 ↗
15. 10.1002/stco.20210003910.1002/stco.202100039 ↗
16. 10.1177/147592171246293710.1177/1475921712462937 ↗
17. ElBatanouny M · 2014
18. Giurgiutiu V · 2007
19. 10.1016/B978-0-08-102679-3.00017-410.1016/B978-0-08-102679-3.00017-4 ↗
20. 10.1106/A1HU-23JD-M5AU-ENGW10.1106/A1HU-23JD-M5AU-ENGW ↗
21. 10.3390/app808126710.3390/app8081267 ↗
22. Gomez AEA · 2017
23. 10.1007/978-3-540-69972-910.1007/978-3-540-69972-9 ↗
24. 10.3390/ma1320469110.3390/ma13204691 ↗
25. 10.1177/147592171771461410.1177/1475921717714614 ↗
26. 10.3390/app923512410.3390/app9235124 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.10714610.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107146 ↗
28. 10.1002/047086909710.1002/0470869097 ↗
29. 10.3390/s1811397310.3390/s18113973 ↗
30. 10.3390/s2112422110.3390/s21124221 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2015.08.02810.1016/j.ymssp.2015.08.028 ↗
32. 10.3390/app812255710.3390/app8122557 ↗
33. 10.3390/s2017465710.3390/s20174657 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.02.01610.1016/j.ymssp.2018.02.016 ↗
35. 10.1007/s40857-020-00208-z10.1007/s40857-020-00208-z ↗
36. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.02.02010.1016/j.engstruct.2010.02.020 ↗
37. Nakamura H · 2016
38. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.10939410.1016/j.ymssp.2022.109394 ↗
39. 10.1002/stc.234010.1002/stc.2340 ↗
40. 10.3390/app1024896610.3390/app10248966 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.sna.2016.05.01410.1016/j.sna.2016.05.014 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.10803910.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108039 ↗
43. 10.3390/app919407010.3390/app9194070 ↗
44. Sause M · Journal of Acoustic Emission · 2011 · 29 · 184
45. 10.1016/j.patrec.2011.09.01810.1016/j.patrec.2011.09.018 ↗
46. 10.1088/0964-1726/19/1/01500710.1088/0964-1726/19/1/015007 ↗
47. Trujillo B · 2014 · 906418 · 360
48. 10.3390/app802016810.3390/app8020168 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12108910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121089 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.measurement.2021.10940710.1016/j.measurement.2021.109407 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.04.02710.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.04.027 ↗
52. 10.3390/s2011309510.3390/s20113095 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.neunet.2015.07.00710.1016/j.neunet.2015.07.007 ↗
54. 10.1177/147592171879876910.1177/1475921718798769 ↗
55. Wu Y, Yang F, Liu Y, et al. (2018) A comparison of 1-D and 2-D deep convolutional neural networks in ECG classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.07088.
56. 10.1186/s43251-020-00006-710.1186/s43251-020-00006-7 ↗
57. 10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.03.01710.1016/j.jcsr.2013.03.017 ↗
58. 10.1117/12.88015710.1117/12.880157 ↗
59. 10.1155/2012/40217910.1155/2012/402179 ↗
60. 10.3390/s2002036410.3390/s20020364 ↗