Received: 25 December 2019 Revised: 6 August 2020 Accepted: 11 August 2020

DOI: 10.1002/stc.2629

REVIEW

Review on field monitoring of high-rise structures

Jiazhan Su1 | Yong Xia2 | Shun Weng3

1
College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou
University, Fuzhou, China Summary
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Structural health monitoring (SHM) has been developed and applied to bridge
Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic structures since the early 1980s. Numerous approaches and techniques have
University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
been proposed and applied to supertall structures during the recent decade.
3
School of Civil Engineering and
Mechanics, Huazhong University of
This paper reviews the SHM techniques and applications in supertall
Science and Technology, Wuhan, China structures. The vibration analysis techniques, seismic effect monitoring, wind
effect monitoring, comfort assessment, temperature effect monitoring, and
Correspondence
Yong Xia, Department of Civil and construction monitoring of high-rise structures are described and summarised.
Environmental Engineering, The Hong The latest developments in codification and standardisation in SHM are
Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, also introduced.
Hong Kong.
Email: ceyxia@polyu.edu.hk
KEYWORDS

Funding information construction monitoring, high-rise structures, structural health monitoring, temperature effect,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, wind effect
Grant/Award Number: 1-ZE1F; Research
Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, China, Grant/
Award Number: PolyU 152621/16E;
Education Department of Fujian Province,
Grant/Award Number: JAT160080

1 | INTRODUCTION

Classification of a high-rise structure has no official definition. A loose convention of the lower limit of a high-rise
structure is 150 m. A skyscraper taller than 300 m can be referred to as a supertall structure.1 Numerous supertall build-
ings have been built across the world in the past decades to meet the economic and social needs of communities, espe-
cially in Asia. Modern building structures are being built with complicated design to ensure a slender appearance,
allow less wind exposure and transmit a large amount of daylight to the ground. The lifecycle safety of these building
structures and their structural performance under natural hazards, such as typhoons and earthquakes, during construc-
tion and service stages are the main concerns of the designer, contractor and client.
Although numerical analysis and scaled laboratory experiments have been widely conducted during the design
stage, the actual loading, environment and responses of the real supertall structures are different from those of the
numerical and laboratory models, due to the assumptions adopted in the numerical model and size effect of the labora-
tory testing. The recently developed structural health monitoring (SHM) technology offers a new innovative approach
to measuring the loads, environmental factors and responses in full scale, and provides the structural performance in
real-time and evaluate the structural serviceability or safety under normal operation or after extreme events.2–5 The
SHM with the first-hand data of the full-scale structure can be used to verify or cross-check the counterparts from the
theoretical analysis, numerical computation and laboratory testing. Owing to their inherent advantages and disadvan-
tages, the SHM, theoretical analysis, numerical computation and laboratory testing are increasingly regarded by practi-
tioners as four wheels driving the development of structural engineering.

Struct Control Health Monit. 2020;e2629. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/stc © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 of 24
https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.2629
2 of 24 SU ET AL.

SHM has been developed for offshore platforms and space shuttles since the 1970s and 1980s.6 The civil engineering
community has been investigating the SHM of bridge structures since the early 1980s.7 Numerous case studies and
operations of SHM have been successfully and widely applied to bridge structures.8–12 However, similar studies on
supertall structures, particularly from the construction to service stage, are quite rare. One major reason is that bridges
are invested and administrated by government or public authorities while supertall buildings by private sectors, who
may be reluctant to pay investment on research. Nevertheless, the success gained in bridge structures has promoted the
applications of the SHM technology to high-rise structures in recent years. To the best knowledge of the authors, the
first systematic in-construction and in-service SHM system in supertall structures was implemented by the authors and
their colleagues on the 600-m-tall Canton Tower (previously called Guangzhou New TV Tower).13
Thus, this review aims to summarise the development and applications of SHM in high-rise structures, especially
the supertall structures, for promoting the development of SHM for high-rise structures. The content of this paper is
organised as follows. Section 2 briefly introduces the objectives and applications of SHM for high-rise structures.
Sections 3 to 8 demonstrate the current progress in vibration analysis, seismic effect monitoring, wind effect monitor-
ing, comfort assessment, thermal monitoring and construction monitoring, respectively. Section 9 provides the SHM
standardisation, and Section 10 presents the conclusion and future work.

2 | SHM SYSTEM AND I TS APPLICATIONS I N S UPERTALL STRUCTURES

2.1 | Functions and components of SHM system

The potential benefits of an SHM exercise can be summarised according to the functions of the SHM system but not
limited to the following2,8,14–16: (1) validate the theoretical assumptions and parameters used in structural design, analy-
sis and laboratory testing; (2) provide real information of the structures after disasters and extreme events to make cost-
effective decisions regarding maintenance and management; (3) improve understanding on the structural loading and
response mechanisms; (4) inspect the safety of the construction activities and ensure that the constructed structure sat-
isfies the design requirement as closely as possible; and (5) obtain massive amounts of in situ data for cutting-edge
research in structural engineering, such as applications of new structural types and smart material.
A typical SHM system should contain a sensory system and data acquisition and transmission system installed on
the structure. The sensory system is responsible for collecting raw data, including loadings (structural temperature,
wind pressure and ground motion), structural responses (settlement, inclination, displacement, strain and acceleration)
and environmental factors (ambient temperature, humidity, solar radiation, air pressure and corrosion). A supertall
structure is over hundreds meters tall, and thus, the centralised data acquisition is not feasible. Therefore, the data
acquisition and transmission system may contain several stand-alone data acquisition units (or substations) distributed
on the structure to collect the sensors' data around the acquisition units.
A few sophisticated long-term SHM systems deployed on supertall structures also contain modules of the data
processing and control system structural health (or performance) evaluation system and data management system in
the central control room, as shown in Figure 1. The data processing and control system is devised to control the data
acquisition and transmission, process and store the data, and display the data. The data management system comprises
the database system for temporal and spatial data management. The structural performance evaluation system may
include an online structural condition evaluation system and/or an offline structural health and safety assessment sys-
tem. The former (online) is mainly to compare the measurement data with the design values, analysis results, and pre-
determined thresholds and patterns to provide a prompt evaluation of the structural condition. The latter (offline)
incorporates varieties of model-based and data-driven algorithms, for example, loading identification, modal identifica-
tion and model updating, and damage diagnosis and prognosis. Some SHM systems also have a portable inspection and
maintenance system for inspecting and maintaining sensors, data acquisition units, and cabling networks.13,17,18

2.2 | SHM application cases

Majority of the practical high-rise structural monitoring has aimed at measuring the loading environment and response
mechanisms for strong winds and earthquakes. For instance, Brownjohn and Pan2 established a long-term monitoring
programme for a 280-m-high office tower in Singapore to track structural performance and monitor structural dynamic
SU ET AL. 3 of 24

FIGURE 1 Modules of structural health monitoring (SHM)

system13

responses during strong winds and earthquakes. More than 160 buildings in California, USA, more than 100 buildings
in Japan and more than 40 buildings in Taiwan have been equipped with strong-motion monitoring systems for seismic
response measurement and post-earthquake damage assessment.19
In China, Li et al20 measured the short-term acceleration responses of the 70-storey (370 m high) Bank of China
Building in Hong Kong to two strong typhoons and compared them with the wind-tunnel test counterparts to study the
wind-induced structural response characteristics. Similar short-term and full-scale measurements of wind-induced
responses programmes have been made to record the wind speed, wind direction and acceleration responses on a num-
ber of supertall buildings (tower) in mainland China. Specifically, Li and his colleagues studied the 391-m-high China
International Trust and Investment Plaza Tower21 and the 432-m-high Guangzhou West Tower22 in Guangzhou, the
384-m-high Di Wang Tower23 and the 600-m-high Ping An Finance Centre24 in Shenzhen, the 421-m-high Jin Mao
Building25 in Shanghai, the 420-m-high International Finance Centre26 in Hong Kong and the 508-m-high Taipei
101 Tower27 in Taipei. Based on the field measurement data, the amplitude-dependent damping has been identified
and compared with the wind-tunnel test results.
Most relevant studies on high-rise structures involve short-term field measurement of structural responses only.
However, the construction stage of a complex supertall structure can be more critical than the service because the struc-
tural configuration and boundary conditions in the construction phase are significantly different from those in the ser-
vice phase. The imperfections during the construction stage will also lead to additional stress and permanent
deformation in the service stage.28 Therefore, an accurate real-time construction stage analysis, including constructed
structural behaviours, external loadings and environmental parameters, needs to be conducted to evaluate the struc-
tural integrity, serviceability and reliability.
An SHM practice that integrates in-construction and in-service monitoring has been exercised on the Canton Tower
(Figure 2), which has more than 800 sensors of 16 types.13 All these sensors were selected to capture the static and
dynamic properties of the structure. The sensors were installed at critical locations according to the finite element
(FE) analysis results of the partial structures at different construction stages and the entire structure upon completed.
The accuracy of the measurement for specific structural responses can be improved by fusing multiple types of sensors
and data. For example, the accelerometers and a series of strain gauges were combined to achieve a reliable measure-
ment of dynamic displacement via a multirate Kalman filtering approach.29
An extensive SHM programme has been executed for understanding the structural and foundation system behav-
iours of the 828-m-tall Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, during the construction and service stages.30
This programme was conducted to monitor the strain of vertical elements, foundation settlement, wall and column ver-
tical shortening due to elastic, shrinkage and creep effects, and the lateral displacement of the tower. The tower lateral
movement monitoring ensured the verticality of the structure during the construction. The vertical strain and shorten-
ing data of the columns and walls assisted the main contractor in compensation of the floor elevation to be constructed,
such that the completed floor elevation met the design value within the specified threshold.
The 632-m-high Shanghai Tower, which is the tallest building in China, implemented a sophisticated SHM system
consisting of 432 sensors (Figure 3) to gain a comprehensive understanding of the structural performance of the
4 of 24 SU ET AL.

F I G U R E 2 Sensor layout of the

monitoring system in Canton Tower13

building when subjected to strong winds, harsh temperatures and earthquakes during and after construction.31 A simi-
lar sophisticated SHM system has been deployed to Tianjin Goldin Finance 117 Tower17 and Ping An Finance Centre.18
Table 1 lists the supertall structures that have been deployed with SHM systems during the construction and/or service
stages. Some of them have an integrated SHM system during both stages, which have many benefits. The installation of
embedment-type sensors, such as embedded strain gauges, temperature sensors and corrosion sensors inside the concrete,
should be in synchronism with the construction progress. These sensors can track the complete historical change in the
parameters from the onset of construction and thus achieve lifecycle monitoring of the structure. In addition, the initial
reading of the strain at the measurement points can be obtained, which enables the calculation of the absolute stress rather
than the relative stress changes. This assists in engineers assessing the safety condition of the structure.

3 | V I B R A T I O N AN A LY S I S T E C H N I Q U ES

Modern skyscrapers with increasing building height and relatively low natural frequency and damping ratio become
sensitive to wind excitations. Field investigations on structural dynamic properties and responses have been performed
SU ET AL. 5 of 24

F I G U R E 3 Sensor layout of the

monitoring system in Shanghai Tower31

on a number of high-rise buildings.20–27 The results were then compared with those calculated from the wind-tunnel
models over the past decades. The dynamic characteristics, including amplitude-dependent damping and natural fre-
quency, were obtained using a number of modal identification methods, such as the fast Fourier transform algorithm,34
short-time Fourier transform,35 peak-picking method,36 random decrement technique,37 Hilbert–Huang transform
method38 and wavelet transform method.39 These methods have been developed and applied to high-rise structures.
For example, He et al24 estimated natural frequencies and damping ratios of Ping An Finance Centre by using peak-
picking method, half-power bandwidth method in the frequency domain and random decrement technique in the time
domain. Two band-pass filtering methods, namely, elliptical filtering method40 and Kaiser-window FIR filter,41 were
adopted to deal with the measured acceleration signals and identify the modal parameters. Based on the field measure-
ments, the range of selection of damping ratio for the wind-resistant design of supertall buildings was recommended.
Detailed discussion and comparisons of these methods for structural modal parameter identification were presented
in a recent reference.42 The fast Fourier transform algorithm is inadequate to depict the time-varying natural frequen-
cies over time. The short-time Fourier transform requires a large window to achieve a good resolution and may fail to
identify closed natural frequencies. The advantages of wavelet transform methods include computational efficiency,
6 of 24 SU ET AL.

TABLE 1 Supertall structures implemented with structural health monitoring (SHM) system

Total
Basic Monitoring no. of
Title information stage sensors Sensors Monitored parameters
Bank of Composite, Service stage 4 Accelerometer (2), Acceleration, displacement, wind
China 370 m, 1990 anemometer (2)
Building
(Hong
Kong)20
Di Wang Composite, Service stage 4 Accelerometer (2), Acceleration, displacement, wind
Tower 384 m, 1996 anemometer (2)
(China)23
CITIC Plaza Composite, Service stage 4 Accelerometer (2), Acceleration, displacement, wind
Tower 391 m, 1996 anemometer (2)
(China)21
Jin Mao Composite, Service stage 3 Accelerometer (2), Acceleration, displacement, wind
Tower 421 m, 1999 anemometer (1)
(China)25
International Composite, Service stage 7 Accelerometer (2), Acceleration, displacement, wind
Finance 420 m, 2003 anemometer (3), GPS (2)
Centre
(Hong
Kong)26
Taipei 101 Composite, Service stage 31 Accelerometer (30), Acceleration, wind
Tower 508 m, 2004 anemometer (1)
(Taiwan)27
Shanghai Composite, Service stage 6 Accelerometer (6) Acceleration
World 492 m, 2008
Finance
Center
(China)32
Guangzhou Composite, Service stage 4 Accelerometer (2), anemometer Acceleration, wind
West 432 m, 2010 (2)
Tower
(China)22
Canton Composite, Construction 843 Accelerometer (22), anemometer Acceleration, corrosion,
Tower 600 m, 2010 and service (2), corrosion sensor (3), digital deflection, displacement,
(China)13 stages video camera (3), fibre optic earthquake, inclination, strain,
sensor (208), GPS (2), level temperature, wind
sensor (2), seismograph (1),
theodolite (2), thermometer
(172), tiltmeter (2), total station
(1), vibrating wire gauge (416),
weather station (1), wind
pressure sensor (4), zenithal
telescope (2)
Burj Khalifa Steel/concrete, Construction 624 Accelerometer (18), inclinometer Acceleration, deflection,
(United 828 m, 2010 and service (160), GPS (3), sonimometer displacement, earthquake,
Arab stages (23), strain gauge (418), total inclination, strain, temperature,
Emirates)30 station (1), weather station (1) wind
Shanghai Composite, Construction 432 Accelerometer (71), anemometer Acceleration, deflection,
Tower 632 m, 2015 and service (1), digital level (1), digital video displacement, earthquake,
(China)31 stages camera (1), GPS (3), inclination, strain, temperature,
inclinometer (40), seismograph wind
(2), strain gauge (209),
SU ET AL. 7 of 24

TABLE 1 (Continued)

Total
Basic Monitoring no. of
Title information stage sensors Sensors Monitored parameters
thermometer (75), total station
(2), wind pressure sensor (27)
Ping An Composite, Construction 553 Accelerometer (10), anemometer Acceleration, corrosion,
Finance 600 m, 2017 and service (1), FBG strain sensor (304), deflection, displacement,
Centre stages FBG temperature sensor (76), earthquake, inclination,
(China)18 GPS (2), inclinometer (32), level reinforcement stress, soil
sensor (1), reinforcement meter pressure, strain, temperature,
(54), seismograph (1), soil wind
pressure gauge (30), total station
(1), weather station (1), wind
pressure sensor (40)
Wuhan Composite, Construction 393 Accelerometer (6), levelling Acceleration, deflection,
Yangtze 330 m, to be and service instrument (1), thermometer displacement, strain,
River completed in stages (192), total station (1), vibrating temperature, wind
Navigation 2020 wire gauge (192), weather
Centre station (1)
(China)33
Tianjin Composite, Construction 580 Accelerometer (85), anemometer Acceleration, corrosion,
Goldin 597 m, to be and service (2), GPS (3), inclinometer (40), deflection, displacement,
Finance completed in stages seismograph (2), strain gauge earthquake, inclination, strain,
117 Tower 2020 (252), thermometer (100), wind temperature, wind
(China)17 pressure sensor (96)

data compression and noise elimination. However, this method suffers from spectral leakage and needs several levels of
decomposition. The Hilbert–Huang transform method is an adaptive signal processing method that can analyse station-
ary, nonstationary and transient signals. However, the accuracy of this method depends on the selected algorithm,
empirical mode decomposition and ensemble empirical mode decomposition. Automated detection of damage out of
the massive amount of noisy data collected from dozens or hundreds of sensors on a daily, weekly and monthly basis is
a major challenge in the realisation of heal monitoring of large structures.
A few new methodologies have been applied to SHM to handle noisy data effectively and ensure accuracy, scalabil-
ity, portability and efficiency. For example, Lei et al43 proposed a time-domain three-stage algorithm for real-time track-
ing of the onset, location and extent of abrupt stiffness degradations in linear or non-linear structures by using the
measured acceleration responses. Amezquita-Sanchez and Adeli44 presented a synchro-squeezed wavelet transform-
fractality model for detecting, locating and quantifying the damage severity in a smart high-rise building. The useful-
ness and effectiveness of the proposed methodology were validated using the measurement data of the 1:20 scaled
model of a 38-storey concrete building structure.
Tsogka et al45 applied the stretching method to directly identify small permanent shifts in the natural frequencies of
the structure under a changing environment by maximising the correlation coefficient between a reference waveform.
The proposed stretching method mitigates the effects of environmental fluctuations by averaging the cross-correlations
over a proper period in the time domain, before taking their Fourier transform to estimate the spectral densities. It can
be regarded as an extension of the classic frequency domain decomposition.
Weng et al46,47 proposed substructuring approaches for calculation of frequencies and mode shapes, which were
subsequently extended to FE model updating and damage detection of large-scale structures. The frequencies and mode
shapes of the global structure were calculated from those of the independent substructures by a forward substructuring
method.46 The local frequencies and mode shapes of one independent substructure were also able to be estimated from
the measurement on the global structure by an inverse substructuring method.47 The proposed substructuring tech-
nique was then applied to the Canton Tower, and the calculation time was approximately one-tenth of the traditional
global approach.47,48
The aforementioned algorithms analyse the dynamic properties of high-rise buildings and promote the vibration-
based SHM.
8 of 24 SU ET AL.

4 | S E I S M I C EF F EC T MO N I T O R I N G

The primary purpose of the seismic monitoring system for a high-rise structure is to enhance the understanding of the
behaviour and potential for damage of structures under earthquakes. It can be achieved by integrating the measure-
ment of transmitted ground motions and structural responses. The measurement data would be compared with the
post-earthquake structural performance for minimising damage to structures during future earthquakes.
The 1995 Hyogo-Ken Nanbu (Kobe) Earthquake in Japan caused significant motivation of applying SHM to building
structures for minimising costs and time through the knowledge of actual damage status. A 31-storey office building
located in Tokyo was instrumented with three-axis accelerometers at the centre of the basement to observe earthquake
motions. The seismic responses during more than 10 earthquakes of different magnitudes have been recorded since
1991.49
Tamura et al50 and Li et al51 conducted an integrated system comprising of RTK-GPS and accelerometers for
assessing full-scale structural responses on a 108-m-high steel tower located in Tokyo by exploiting the complementary
characteristics of GPS and accelerometers. The seismic and wind-induced responses of the tower measured from GPS,
accelerometer sensors, anemometer and strain gauge were analysed. These applications of SHM provided an ideal
opportunity for an integrated approach of SHM involving novel sensors, communications and embedded systems as
well as data management and mining.52
In the United States, several tall buildings in the earthquake areas have been installed with seismic instrumenta-
tions to record the ground motions and seismic responses for assessing antiseismic design procedures and inferring seis-
mic damage. In California, the California Strong Motion Instrumentation Program has installed ground response
stations on about 160 buildings to provide information on ground motions and to improve the structural design based
on the feedback of the structural health subject to these ground motions.19
Çelebi and Safak53 recorded a set of strong-motion-induced acceleration responses from a 60-storey building in San
Francisco, during the Loma Prieta earthquake on October 17, 1989. The building was instrumented with synchronised
accelerometers and strong-motion accelerographs deployed throughout the structure and connected to a central
recording system. Other buildings with similar seismic instrument systems include the 47-storey moment-resisting
framed and eccentrically braced Embarcadero Building in San Francisco,54 with six digital seismic accelerographs of a
total of 18 channels, the 42-storey steel-frame Chevron Building in San Francisco,55 with a set of 14 accelerometers, and
the 30-storey reinforced concrete (RC) framed Pacific Park Plaza Building in San Francisco,56 with 21 channels of
synchronised uniaxial accelerometers.
In Singapore, Brownjohn57 installed a dual-rover GPS and integrated with the existing long-term monitoring system
for the Republic Plaza to capture ground vibrations caused by large earthquakes occurring at least 400 km from
Singapore. The correlation between the recorded ground motions at the building site and the simulated seismic
response of the building has been analysed.58
In Taiwan, a considerable number of tall buildings have been instrumented with vibration monitoring systems for
measuring ground motions and seismic responses. They experienced moderate structural damage during the 1999
Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake.59
In summary, seismic monitoring systems have been deployed in many high-rise buildings. The measured seismic
response data from the instrumented buildings has been utilised for vibration-based structural condition and integrity
assessment. The GPS receiver on the earth may also be used as a seismometer to observe predominantly horizontal
components of surface seismic waves generated by large earthquakes since the GPS satellites are not affected by
earthquakes.60

5 | WIND EF FE CT MON I TORI N G

Wind loading is one of the critical loads on a high-rise structure located in coastal cities that are frequently subjected to
typhoons or hurricanes. Wind pressure fluctuations in the windward and leeward faces due to the fluctuation in wind
velocity and its interaction with the building result in along- or cross-wind vibrations. High-rise structures are prone to
significant dynamic wind-induced responses due to low natural frequency and small structural damping. Modern
high-rise structures are no longer designed to be symmetrically rectangular, triangular or circular in plan, and new
and unconventional free-style design is increasing. Therefore, the wind effect is a major concern in the design of
high-rise structures.
SU ET AL. 9 of 24

Boundary layer wind-tunnel tests on scaled models of structures and their surroundings are widely used to identify
the wind loads and associated structural responses. Specifically, Gu and Quan,61 Quan et al62 and Zhou et al63 used
aerodynamic/aeroelastic models to investigate the characteristics of wind pressure and forces in the time and frequency
domains acting on 15 typical high-rise structures with various cross-sections. The power spectrum of the across-wind
force of the structure was utilised to compute its across-wind dynamic responses with and without considering the
effect of the aerodynamic damping. The results were then compared with the corresponding responses from the aero-
elastic model test to verify the present formulas of the across-wind loads of buildings. Kim and You64 and Kim and
Kanda65 obtained aerodynamic parameters, including along-wind and across-wind force coefficients, characteristics of
wind force power spectra and fluctuating displacement/acceleration responses on various wind directions, from wind-
tunnel tests. These parameters were then adopted for structural analysis or design. However, the exact field conditions,
such as incident turbulence and terrain characteristics in wind-tunnel tests, are generally difficult to produce.66 There-
fore, full-scale field measurements are always worthwhile.
The recently developed field monitoring exercises of high-rise structures under strong winds usually focus on mea-
suring wind speed and direction by anemometers, wind pressure by pressure sensors and wind-induced structural
response by accelerometers.67 The full-scale monitoring exercises during monsoons and typhoons provide a reliable
approach to verifying the relevant codes adopted in wind-resistant design of high-rise structures and to validating the
wind-tunnel testing results.
Abdelrazaq et al68 performed full-scale monitoring for a 73-storey 264-m-high tower located in Seoul, Korea, and
compared the in situ measurements with those predicted from codes and those adopted in the tower's design. In Japan,
Ohtake et al69 and Tamura et al70 recorded the wind-induced responses of the 125-m-high Chiba Port Tower and the
77.6-m-high Tokyo International Airport Tower, respectively, to investigate the effectiveness of the tuned dampers in
reducing the wind-induced responses. Balendra et al71 conducted the full-scale measurement of the wind-induced
responses of several typical high-rise buildings in Singapore to enhance the understanding of the relation between the
wind speed and acceleration of the buildings on the basis of the wind-tunnel test and field measurement results. A few
short-term full-scale measurement studies of the wind effects on high-rise structures20–27 were conducted in Hong
Kong, Taiwan, and mainland China, as illustrated in Section 2.2.
Monitoring the performance of the high-rise structures under harsh typhoon conditions and the subsequent data
analysis provides reliable information on the wind loading and the responses, which will be useful in gaining an in-
depth understanding of the wind-resistant design.
Structural dynamic responses, such as the acceleration and lateral displacement, are essential information for
designing high-rise structures under strong winds. Accelerometers have been widely used to measure structural vibra-
tion, which helps assess structural serviceability such as human comfort. However, the accurate direct measurement of
the lateral displacement of high-rise structures has been a difficult task. The displacement can be obtained by a double
integral of the acceleration responses.72 This method has difficulty in capturing the static or quasi-static displacement
of the structure because accelerometers are insensitive to the low-frequency vibrations.
By contrast, the GPS with real-time kinematic (RTK) technology can measure static and dynamic displacement
responses with a rate of up to 20 Hz and an accuracy of subcentimetre to the millimetre level. This technology provides
a great opportunity to monitor the displacement of high-rise buildings in real-time under strong winds.73 In 1995,
Lovse et al74 measured structural vibrations in the 160-m-high Calgary Tower, Canada using GPS receivers in
differential mode.
Two GPS receivers are usually used to achieve an accurate measurement: one is located in a stable position as the
reference station, and the other is on the structure as the rover to measure its movement. Ogaja et al75 identified the
changes in the movement pattern of the 280-m-high 66-storey Republic Plaza Building. Park et al76 monitored the
complete motion history of a 66-storey high-rise building subject to the yellow dust storm using the high-precision
GPS-RTK technique. The results showed that GPS could be successfully applied to monitor structural vibrations after
removing the GPS multipath errors due to the radio signals reflected off of surrounding objects. Yi et al77 extracted the
multipath effects by a combination of empirical mode decomposition and wavelet method. The effects were then
removed by a high-pass finite impulsive response digital filter to improve the performance of the GPS.
Kijewski-Correa and Pirnia78 used high-precision GPS stations for tracking static and dynamic displacements of
some representative tall building structures in Boston, Chicago and Seoul, in which wind speed, wind direction and
displacement responses were simultaneously and continuously measured under strong wind conditions. Their studies
encouraged the use of SHM for civil engineering structures and expanded the existing databases of full-scale dynamic
properties of tall buildings to further advance the state-of-the-art in tall building design.
10 of 24 SU ET AL.

Yi and Li79 and Li et al80 measured mean and fluctuating forces and pressures on the scaled model of a 420-m tall
supertall building and the surrounding condition in a wind tunnel, through the high-frequency force balance technique
and synchronous multipressure sensing system under two typical boundary layer wind flow fields. Full-scale
measurements of the wind effects on the supertall building in Hong Kong, such as wind speed, wind direction,
structural acceleration and displacement responses during the passage of 12 typhoons since 2008, have been
continuously recorded. The wind tunnel and full-scale studies were helpful for the wind-resistant design of supertall
buildings in the region.
He et al81 analysed the field measurements of wind-induced pressures on building claddings and structural
responses of the 600-m-high Ping An Finance Centre in Shenzhen, China, during the passage of Typhoon Haima. Based
on the field measurements, the amplitude-dependent characteristics of the modal parameters were discussed. The range
of selection of damping ratio for the wind-resistant design of supertall buildings was recommended. The serviceability
of the skyscraper under typhoon condition was then assessed.
Su et al82 compared the field measured quasi-static horizontal displacement of the Canon Tower with the wind-
tunnel test results of an aeroelastic model. The field measurement results caused by Typhoon Usagi on September
22–23, 2013 were first obtained by removing the temperature effect. As shown in Figure 4a, the maximum horizontal
displacement in the east–west measured 11.2 cm, occurring at 4:00 on September 23 when the mean wind speed was
25 m/s and the wind direction was 285 (Figure 4b). Under these wind conditions, the wind-tunnel test result
was 12.0 cm, very close to the measurement result. The largest horizontal displacement in the south–north direction
was roughly −4.9 cm for the field measurement and −2.3 cm for the wind-tunnel test (Figure 4c). The horizontal
displacements varied approximately in a quadric relation with the mean wind speed.
In a word, the wind monitoring system has been deployed in many high-rise buildings. Most instrumentation
systems for strong winds have successfully recorded wind loadings and wind-induced responses of the structures. The
exercises are useful for verifying the wind-tunnel testing and FE analysis results and understanding the dynamic
behaviour of buildings.

6 | COMFORT A SSESSMENT

Wind and seismic forces are dominant in most high-rise structures. Habitability limit states often govern the design of
high-rise structures, as accelerations induced by wind or earthquake increase with the increase in the height of high-
rise structures and become more perceptible to occupants.83 If the response of such high-rise structures to imposed
vibration is too strong, it may cause annoyance, motion sickness and ultimately panic to the occupants. Therefore,
uncertainty surrounding environmental vibration has been recognised as a significant serviceability issue.
Architectural Institute of Japan Recommendations, 2004 (AIJ-GEH-200484) provides guidelines based on vibration
perception presented in a probabilistic framework. Probabilistic evaluation methods were proposed by Kanda et al85
and Tamura et al86 to take into consideration of the uncertainties in parameters including vibration perception and/or
occupant comfort statistics. Bashor and Kareem87 proposed a probabilistic occupant comfort evaluation scheme based
on the first-order reliability method that accounts for the uncertainties in both the estimation of building accelerations
associated with the wind load-response-performance chain and the occupant comfort acceleration criteria. These evalu-
ation methodologies provide a more advanced and sophisticated platform to assess the occupant comfort and evaluate
the building habitability.
Fear and alarm are primarily caused by wind-induced vibration associated with infrequent extreme wind events
such as typhoons and thunderstorms, while discomfort results from sustained and/or frequently occurring vibration
associated with long-duration regularly occurring wind events.88 Occupants subjected to a longer duration building
vibration are more likely to experience discomfort and hence complain than those subjected to the same vibration mag-
nitude but for a shorter duration.
In ISO 10137:2007(E),89 the evaluation curves for the habitability of buildings subjected to wind-induced vibrations
with a recurrence interval of 1 year is based on two frequency-dependent acceptance curves: one for residences
and one for offices. The acceptance curve for residences is similar to the 90% perception probability curve, given in
AIJ-GEH-2004,84 and the acceptance curve for offices is factored by 0.7.
Based on experiences in Hong Kong, where the majority of residential buildings is multistorey high-rise apartment
buildings, a significant number of those buildings would not have met the proposed criterion for residences.90,91 It was
suggested that the acceptance criterion for residences proposed in ISO 10137: 2007(E)89 might be conservative.
SU ET AL. 11 of 24

FIGURE 4 Displacement responses of Canton tower during typhoon Usagi82. (a) Purely typhoon-induced quasi-static responses.
(b) East–west direction in the wind-tunnel test. (c) South–north direction in the wind-tunnel test

Liao92 developed a vibration comfort assessment framework for high-rise structures using the acceleration responses
at different heights by considering various factors such as section type, torsion effect, whole structure response and
uncertainties. The framework was then applied to the comfort assessment of the Canton Tower using the monitoring
data acquired during four typhoons. The principle of equivalent normalisation was introduced to evaluate the reliability
index because both the monitoring-obtained distribution and the distribution assumed in design do not obey the nor-
mal distribution. Similarly, the vibration comfort assessment framework was employed to assess the comfort of the
Canton Tower under earthquakes. In consideration of the uncertainties in both structural responses and criteria used
in this assessment framework, a probability-based comfort assessment method for the top floor was proposed, in which
the distributions of peak values under earthquakes are addressed.
Most of the criteria were established by experimental studies, which may vary from site measurement. Results of
the comfort assessment can be derived from monitored data that are captured by the SHM system, though such practice
engineering is rare. With the SHM system, the daily monitoring of various responses of structures can be used in com-
fort assessment, in which more indices related to comfort can be derived.

7 | TEMPERATURE EFFECT MONITORING

7.1 | General

Civil engineering structures are subject to daily, seasonal and yearly environmental thermal effects induced by solar
radiation and ambient air temperature. The thermal conductivity of a structural component is dependent on the
12 of 24 SU ET AL.

material characteristics. Accordingly, the structural members consisting of different materials experience varying tem-
perature distributions. If the part of the members is exposed to the sunlight and the rest to the shade, they will also have
different temperature distributions even though the members have the same material.
A few early built supertall structures have outer tubes that were fully or partially exposed for architectural reasons.
The temperature actions on these structures are significant because of the temperature difference between the inner
and outer tubes. Modern supertall structures are usually enclosed in exterior glass curtain walls to provide steady tem-
perature conditions. Temperature actions may not be critical for such structures under the service stage. However, the
whole structures are subject to daily and seasonal climatic changes during the construction stage. These structures
induce more critical temperature actions therein than during the service stage. The temperature-induced daily move-
ment of a high-rise structure during the construction stage may be similar to or even larger than the typhoon-induced
motion. Xia et al93 reported that the GPS-measured maximum tower top daily motion of the Canton Tower during a
sunny day was 16.1 cm in the east–west direction and 7.4 cm in the south–north. In the meantime, the counterparts
was 15.2 and 8.1 cm during Typhoon Koppu strucking Guangdong Province from September 14 to 15, 2009, when the
structure was still under construction.
The cross-sectional temperature distribution within an individual structural element is divided into four essential
components (Figure 5)94: (a) a uniform temperature component ΔTu, which is given by the difference between the aver-
age temperature of an element and its initial temperature; (b) two linearly varying temperature difference components
about the z-z axis ΔTMy and y-y axis ΔTMz, which are given by the difference between the temperatures on the outer
and inner surfaces of a cross-section, or on the surfaces of individual layers; and (c) a non-linear component ΔTE. The
uniform temperature component may cause longitudinal deformation, and the linear temperature difference compo-
nent may cause the curvature of the member, whereas the non-linear one results in the self-equilibrated stresses that
produce no net load effect on the structural element. The temperature variation of different parts of a structure is given
by the difference of average temperatures of these parts. However, Chinese national standard GB 50009 specifies the
uniform temperature change only but has no clause on the temperature difference between different members.95 One
possible reason is the shortage of field measurement data regarding the thermal action of high-rise structures in China.
Radiation and daily temperature fluctuation significantly influence the overall deflection and stresses and the struc-
tural vibration characteristics of supertall structures and long-span bridges because of the indeterminacy and non-
uniform distribution of temperature.96–98 In the past decades, extensive studies on the temperature effects on bridges
have been conducted.99–102 By contrast, investigations of tall buildings are limited because of the uniqueness of the con-
struction site and structural configuration. This situation causes difficulty in drawing general conclusions.

7.2 | Temperature-induced deflection and stress

The temperature effects on tall steel frame buildings have been analysed as early as the 1970s through numerical
techniques.103–105 These studies were only limited to the temperature effect of the local components rather than the
overall structure. With the development of the SHM technology, temperature distribution and temperature-induced
responses of structures have been monitored. The structural thermal behaviours would be understood better from the
real-time measurement of temperature, deformation, strain and stress.
Pirner and Fischer106 made a long-term observation of wind and temperature effects on a 198-m-high TV tower that
has already been in service for nearly 30 years. They analysed the available data to determine the service life of the

FIGURE 5 Diagrammatic representation of constituent components of a temperature profile94

SU ET AL. 13 of 24

antennae tower and mast and revealed that the stresses due to the non-uniform temperature changes were significant.
Tamura et al50 used an RTK-GPS measurement system to measure the deformation of a 108-m-high steel tower on a
fine weather day. The measurement results indicated that the top of the tower moved to northwest direction by approx-
imately 4 cm in the daytime and returned to the original point after sunset. Seco et al107 continuously monitored a
30-m-tall concrete building and quantified the statistical relation between the environmental conditions and building
movement. Breuer et al108 investigated the temperature distribution of the Stuttgart TV Tower (with 212 m high) and
measured the displacements caused by the combined influence of solar radiation and daily air temperature variation
during different seasons and weather conditions. The displacement and stresses due to temperature changes were a
function of the movement of the sun throughout the day.
However, accurately obtaining the temperature distribution of supertall buildings is a challenge because of the lim-
ited number of sensors, complex structural configurations and highly uncertain varying meteorological environments.
Integration of field monitoring and numerical thermal analysis facilitates a thorough and quantitative understanding of
the temperature behaviours of a supertall structure. Densely distributed temperature and strain sensors have been
installed on the Canton Tower (600 m tall),109 Ping An Finance Centre (600 m)18 and Shanghai Tower (632 m).31 These
sensors provide a good opportunity for monitoring structural temperature during the construction and service stages.
Based on the 5-year field monitoring data during the service stage of the Canton Tower and numerical heat-transfer
analysis, Su et al110 derived the temperature loading model of the entire structure, including (1) the temperature differ-
ence between different facades of the inner tube, (2) the temperature difference profile of the outer tube and (3) the dis-
tribution of the temperature difference between the inner and outer tubes along with the structural height. The results
showed that the non-uniform distribution of the temperature field between the different components of the structure
was significant and should be carefully considered in the analysis of such a complex supertall structure. The tempera-
ture effects on the tower top horizontal displacement during different seasons, the stresses of different components and
the bending moments/shear forces along the structural height were also investigated. The results indicated that (i) the
peak-to-peak tower top motion throughout a sunny day in winter was 15.7 cm in the east–west direction and 15.5 cm
in the south–north direction, and the maximum displacement was approximately 20 cm. Moreover, the overall tower
leaned towards the northeast approximately 20 cm from summer to winter. The tower had a larger daily horizontal dis-
placement in the winter than that in the other seasons (Figure 6a). (ii) The temperature-induced vertical stresses of the
inner tube increased as temperature increased from winter to summer. The compressive stress of the CFT columns on
the northeast facade decreased, whereas that on the southwest facade increased from winter to summer. The tempera-
ture variations caused the redistribution of the stresses of the entire structure (Figure 6b). (iii) The internal forces of the
highest stories were larger than those of the lower stories, which is different from the wind loading effect that generally

FIGURE 6 Temperature-induced responses of Canton Tower.110 (a) Tower top horizontal movement in 1 day. (b) Stress variation
profiles of the outer tube from summer to winter (unit: MPa)
14 of 24 SU ET AL.

causes the largest force in the bottom of the structure. This study provided first-hand data for the design of supertall
structures in the tropical region of China.
Thereafter, Su et al82 calculated the temperature-induced responses by applying the above-mentioned temperature
loading model to the FE model of the structure. The purely typhoon-induced quasi-static responses were then separated
from the total measured responses by subtracting the temperature-induced ones. The peak-to-peak horizontal mean dis-
placements at the tower top induced by the strong Typhoon Usagi were 13.1 and 7.1 cm in the east–west and south–
north directions, respectively, which are larger than the combined displacement due to mean wind and temperature
(10.1 and 7.0 cm). If the thermal effects are not removed, the typhoon-induced displacement will be underestimated.
Hu et al111 studied the temperature-induced displacement of the Canton Tower by the data-driven approach based on
the sufficient real measurement data obtained from the SHM system. A multiple linear regression model was also used
to establish the quantitative relation between the displacement and temperature data at different facades and sections
of the structure in various seasons. The physical relationship between temperature and displacement was provided. The
temperature- and wind-induced displacement was separated using this model.
However, such divide-and-conquer approach is inefficient for thermal analysis of supertall structures because the
temperature loads need to be inputted to the 3D FE model requiring considerable manual intervention. This drawback
causes the temperature behaviour analysis to be performed at several particular time instants only, neither in real-time
nor continuously.
Gao et al33 presented an automatic and efficient 3D global FE approach to calculating the temperature distribution
and temperature-induced responses of the 335-m-tall Wuhan Yangtze River Navigation Centre. The position of the sun
relative to the structure was determined by introducing a radiation calendar system. A virtual sun was created to distin-
guish the irradiation and shade faces of the structural model. Consequently, the solar radiation intensity on the surfaces
of all elements was calculated at any particular time of the day. Accordingly, the heat transfer analysis of the entire
structure was conducted, and the temperature distribution of the entire structure was calculated in real-time. After the
calculated temperature distribution was inputted to the same FE model, the temperature-induced stress and displace-
ment responses of the structure were obtained.
The above-mentioned temperature analysis procedure can be similarly applied to other structures. The results may
not necessarily represent other structures because the temperature characteristics depend on the structural configura-
tions, construction materials, meteorological conditions and geographical locations. If more and more such monitoring
exercise are implemented, the temperature loading models of high-rise buildings can be established.

7.3 | Thermal effects on modal properties

Temperature variation is a complicated affecting factor of the modal properties of structures, such as frequencies, mode
shapes and damping. A few studies have found that changes in structural vibration properties caused by temperature
variations can be more significant than those caused by a medium degree of structural damage112 or under normal
operational loads.113 Modal properties are widely used for structural condition assessment. Thus, the relation between
temperature and dynamic properties of a structure should be taken into account to avoid false condition assessments.
In practice, temperature affects structures in a rather complicated manner.96 First, temperature causes the change
in material properties, in particular the modulus of elasticity. This situation leads to variations in the modal properties
of structures. Second, different surfaces of a high-rise building receive different solar irradiations at various times.
Thermal inertia also makes variations of the surface temperature larger than those inside the structure. The latter lags
behind the former by a few hours depending on the structural configuration. Accordingly, the temperature distribution
is generally non-uniform. Third, the expansion or shrink induced by the temperature variation of structures may also
lead to support movements or changes in boundary conditions. This situation causes changes in the modal properties.
Although the temperature influences the modal data in a complicated manner, an increase in temperature leads to a
decrease in the natural frequencies with varying magnitudes depending on structural configuration, materials and
temperature range.
Variations in frequencies of high-rise structures have not been studied as extensively as bridge structures.114–118
Nayeri et al119 monitored a 17-storey steel frame building. A strong correlation between frequencies and air
temperature were found, and the frequency variations lagged behind temperature variations by a few hours. Yuen
and Kuok120 extracted the modal frequencies of a 22-storey RC building for 1 year using the Bayesian spectral
density pproach, where the first three frequencies increased with an increase in ambient temperature. Faravelli
SU ET AL. 15 of 24

et al121 observed that the frequencies of the Canton Tower varied by 0.5% only as the ambient temperature changed
by about 3 C during a 24-h period.
Xia et al122 studied the thermal effect on the modal properties of the Canton Tower. The first four frequencies,
namely, two bending modes along the short axis and two bending modes along the long axis of the inner tube,
decreased when temperature increased, as shown in Figure 7. The linear regression model was applied to four modal
frequencies and temperature. A good linear correlation was observed, and the correlation coefficients for the four
modes were 0.84, 0.86, 0.82 and 0.87. Although the high-rise building was quite complicated, variations in the bending
frequencies were mainly caused by the change in the material modulus under different temperatures. The temperature
effects on the mode shapes of the structure were investigated by comparing the modal assurance criterion (MAC)
between the mode shapes measured at different hours and those at 16:00 with a high temperature. A low temperature
led to a small MAC, which indicated a worse correlation between the mode shapes. Variations in the four damping
ratios did not show a clear trend.
Xia et al123 quantitatively analysed the temperature effect on the frequency changes. They concluded that the rate of
the frequency change with temperature was approximately half of the rate of the material's elasticity modulus change
with temperature. Specifically, modal frequencies of the steel, aluminium and concrete structures decreased by approxi-
mately 0.02%, 0.03% and 0.15%, respectively, when temperature increased by 1 C regardless of modes and structural
types. Frequencies of concrete structures were more sensitive to temperature change than metallic structures.

8 | IN-CONS T R U CTI ON MON I TO R I NG

8.1 | General

The changing loadings and environmental factors of high-rise structures bring difficulty in construction positioning.
Moreover, the constructed structure may deviate from the design because the structural system, material properties,
loads and actions in the construction phase are time-varying and totally different from those in the service phase. The

FIGURE 7 Variations in frequencies versus temperature of the Canton Tower122. (a) First short axis. (b) First long axis. (c) Second
short axis. (d) Second long axis
16 of 24 SU ET AL.

differential axial shortening of vertical members may not affect these elements to any great extent; however, horizontal
elements, such as beams and slabs, can be severely affected.124–126 Therefore, the vertical displacement (or settlement)
of the foundation and superstructure has been a primary concern of the structural condition throughout the construc-
tion stage.30 Strain monitoring of main structural components is essential for the construction of high-rise structures.
The measured strain from the beginning of construction can be transferred into the corresponding stress to assess the
material resistance and safety margin of the structural components.

8.2 | Settlement monitoring

In the current practice of high-rise structural construction, the differential settlement of the structural members is
controlled or compensated using an empirical value of predetermined height in the next construction stage; thus, the
elevation of the member meets the design requirements via the FE construction stage analysis following the real
construction sequence.127 Construction stage analysis for a high-rise structure can be classified into forward and
backward analyses according to the analysis sequence.128 Forward analysis follows the real construction sequence. By
contrast, backward analysis regards the state of the ultimately completed structure as the initial state and then
eliminates the elements and loads in the reverse sequence to the real construction one.
However, accurately predicting the amount of settlement is difficult due to the idealisation of the material properties
and the assumptions in the analytical models.129–131 The construction stage analysis can neither timely and accurately
adjust the geometric position when the actual construction state deviates from the design one nor consider various
uncertainties associated with civil engineering structures (e.g., measurement noise and modelling errors).132,133 These
uncertainties should be investigated and taken into account in the settlement prediction.
Su et al134 proposed an integrated construction settlement monitoring method combining the Kalman filtering
approach and the FE forward construction stage analysis (Figure 8). This method was applied to the 632-m-tall
Shanghai Tower. The initial state and the noise vectors at each step were all assumed to be mutually independent. With
the initial value of state variables, the predicted values were calculated. The first task during the measurement update
was to compute the Kalman gain K(k). The next step was to measure the process Z(k), and the posteriori state estimate
was obtained by incorporating the measurement. Lastly, the posteriori error covariance was estimated. After each time
update and measurement update cycle, the process was repeated with the previous posteriori estimate used to project
or predict the new a priori estimate. With the Kalman filter method, the modelling errors and the measurement noise
were filtered out. The updated results considered the construction load effects and various uncertainties. Consequently,
the results were realistic and accurate for analysing the predetermined height of the floors of this supertall building
(Figure 9a). The initial state parameters and the noise covariance may also affect the filtering results to a certain degree
(Figure 9b).

8.3 | Strain monitoring

Strain monitoring of large-scale structures by using electrical strain gauges, vibrating-wire strain gauges or fibre optical
strain sensors has been widely executed. Fuhr et al135 embedded fibre optic and conventional sensors into the concrete

FIGURE 8 Procedures of the

Kalman filter
SU ET AL. 17 of 24

FIGURE 9 Settlement monitoring results of Shanghai tower at different construction stages.134 (a) Elevation of the eighth floor core-
wall. (b) Elevation of the eighth floor super-column

superstructure of the Stafford Building. The sensors monitored stresses, vibration and internal crack incurred during
the construction phase and concrete curing.
Xia et al28 analysed the strain and stress in Canton Tower during the construction stage. The shrinkage and creep
models for concrete based on field experiments were established and compared with the formulae adopted by the
American Concrete Institute. The measured principal stresses of the critical components during a long-distance earth-
quake, typhoons and construction activities were compared. The stress development of the tower throughout the entire
construction stage was investigated through FE numerical analysis and field monitoring.
A total of 224 vibrating-wire strain gauges, which were part of the long-term SHM system, were installed on the
245-m-tall New Headquarters of Shenzhen Stock Exchange to measure the strain responses of key structural compo-
nents during the construction.136 The structure had a 162 × 98 × 24 m suspension at the height of 36 m above the gro-
und. A wireless strain monitoring system was developed for real-time strain monitoring and visualisation by integrating
local tethered data acquisition and long-range wireless data transmission. The system monitored the demolition process
of the temporary scaffolds of the suspension part in real-time and provided a safe, controlled and efficient construction.
Glisic et al137 implemented a large-scale lifetime building monitoring programme on a high-rise building in
Singapore. The authors also collected 10-year local and global strain data by using long-gauge fibre optic sensors from
construction, upon completion of each new storey and the roof and after the construction. The long-term behaviour of
the building throughout every stage of life could be followed and evaluated based on the measured results.
Li et al18 installed 304 FBG strain sensors on Ping An Finance Centre. The sensors monitored time histories of
instantaneous strain responses and 10 min mean from four selected strain gauges at the 90th floor during a typhoon.
The variation in the strain was consistent with those of either the wind-induced pressures on cladding or the structural
acceleration responses.

9 | CODES AND STANDARDS

SHM techniques have been widely studied, and hundreds of bridges and high-rise buildings worldwide have SHM sys-
tems installed for long-term and periodic monitoring. Researchers and end-users have acknowledged the importance of
SHM technologies. However, the lack of codes and standards is a serious obstacle to the application of SHM in practice.
To shorten the gap between SHM theories and engineering applications, some guidelines of SHM techniques have
been developed. Several guidelines have been recommended by the International Society for Structural Health Monitor-
ing of Intelligent Infrastructure since 2007.138 For example, ISIS Design Manual No. 2139 includes the SHM composi-
tion, sensing and acquisition system, structural damage identification methods, static and dynamic field test and
periodical monitoring. ISO 18649140 involves the structural identification and time-frequency analysis methods, struc-
tural modelling, evaluation and loading simulation for bridges. Aktan et al141 focused on the concept and prospects of
SHM and the network transmission and control, measurement checking and data management for bridges.
18 of 24 SU ET AL.

TABLE 2 Monitoring stage requirement for high-rise buildings and long-span bridges145

Type of
structure Structural features
High-rise Over 250 m high or axial
buildings shortening of vertical
members is significant
Over 300 m high
Long-span With a single span longer
bridges than 150 m
Girder bridges with a main
span longer than 150 m
Cable-stayed bridges with a
main span longer than
300 m
Suspension bridges with a
main span longer than
150 m
Arch bridges with a main
span longer than 200 m
Bridges in a complex
environment or with a
special structure
Monitoring
stage Compulsory monitoring
requirement items Elective monitoring items
Construction Settlement, displacement, Acceleration, temperature and humidity,
stage strain wind
Service stage Displacement, earthquake Acceleration, settlement, strain,
temperature and humidity, wind
Construction Settlement, deformation, Acceleration, horizontal displacement
stage strain, temperature and Wind for girder and arch bridges
humidity
Wind for cable-stayed and
suspension bridges
Service stage Deformation, strain, Settlement, earthquake, acceleration,
temperature and support reaction and displacement,
humidity, vehicle load horizontal displacement, wind
Service stage Deformation, strain, Settlement, horizontal displacement,
temperature and earthquake, acceleration, support
humidity, vehicle load, reaction and displacement
wind
Service stage Deformation, strain, Settlement, horizontal displacement,
temperature and earthquake, acceleration, support
humidity, vehicle load, reaction and displacement
wind
Service stage Deformation, strain, Settlement, horizontal displacement,
temperature and earthquake, acceleration, support
humidity, vehicle load reaction and displacement, wind
Service stage According to design According to design requirements
requirements

Bergmeister142 reported the monitoring and safety evaluation concept, structure and material, visual inspection and tra-
ditional field test, nondestructive detection, measurement method, system implementation and data acquisition,
statistical analysis and assessment and monitoring examples for the concrete structure. The guideline by Rücker et al143
demonstrated damage identification in the SHM.
The first standard in SHM in China144 consisted of the detailed introduction of sensor selection and placement, data
acquisition and processing, data transmission, data storage and management and structure state identification and
health. Afterwards, National Standards145 on ‘Technical code for monitoring of building and bridge structures’, Trans-
port Industry Standards on ‘Technical specification for structural safety monitoring systems of highway bridges’146 and
Associational Standard on ‘Standard for testing and monitoring on structural vibrations using fibre grating sensors’147
and ‘Early warning threshold standard for SHM system of long-span bridges’148 were published based on the rapid
development and wide applications of SHM techniques in China. In particular, the National Standards145 clearly specify
the structural configurations that need to be installed with the SHM system during the service and/or construction
stages, as listed in Table 2.

1 0 | CHALLENG ES, DISCUSS IONS AND C ONCLUS IONS

SHM has become a popular research topic and gained tremendous attention in the civil engineering community
in recent years. The major values and functions of SHM in high-rise buildings include but are not limited: (1) to
ensure the safety and serviceability of the structure during the construction and service; (2) to understand the
SU ET AL. 19 of 24

real-world behaviour of the structures subjected to environmental effects, operational loadings and multihazards;
(3) to validate the assumptions used in FE modelling and laboratory testing; (4) to evaluate the structural
condition, particularly after hazards or events occur; (5) to provide maintenance guidance to the client and (6) to
predict the residual capacity and remaining service life of the structure. For example, the in-construction
monitoring of the Burj Khalifa tower ensured the construction accuracy of the structure during the construction
through surveying and elevation compensation.30 The long-term temperature data of the Canton Tower110 shorten
the gap in the Chinese design code regarding the temperature loading of supertall structures.95 Field measure-
ments of the wind effects on a 420-m-tall supertall building in Hong Kong verified the wind characteristics used
in the wind-tunnel testing and FE analysis, and the wind-resistant design of high-rise structures.79,80 The field
vibration data of the Canton Tower under typhoons and earthquakes were used to verify the mathematical model
of the comfort assessment and related design assumption.92 The monitoring data recorded during three typhoons
and a seismic event of the Taipei 101 Tower were used to estimate the wind and seismic effects on the structure
and to evaluate the performance of the building after hazards.149
This paper reviewed several essential aspects of SHM in high-rise structures during the past decades. Theoretical
and technical problems exist for complex high-rise structures. The following aspects need further investigations and
development to maximise the benefits of SHM.
The temperature effect on a high-rise structure often mixes with other loading effects, for example, typhoons. The
temperature behaviour needs to be understood and extracted for understanding other loading effects accurately. Given
the complex configuration of high-rise structures, the 3D global heat-transfer analysis that provides the efficient and
accurate temperature distribution of the entire structure should be implemented widely. Besides, temperature monitor-
ing on different structures in different meteorological conditions and geographical locations will provide complete real
data of temperature loading models, which will shorten in the gap in relevant standards.
Strain monitoring of main structural components is essential for the construction of building structures. At the same
time, the concrete creep and shrinkage effect greatly influence the structural deformation, which may cause a signifi-
cant redistribution of internal forces. The strain in the key components of the structure should be continuously moni-
tored during construction to control the structural stress levels and deformation.
Construction monitoring and stage analysis are necessary to supertall structures taller than 300 m for ensuring the
final constructed structure be consistent with the designed one as closely as possible. Time-varying properties of mate-
rials play an essential role in the accuracy of the stage analysis. To achieve this, in situ tests of the materials' mechanical
properties should be conducted.
SHM codes and standards provide the reference, support and direction for the SHM applications. They also promote
the applications of new and intelligent materials in structural engineering to construct smart structures with high safety
and durability. Existing guidelines represent an interim summary of the state of the art of SHM techniques and will be
refined gradually in the future.
An SHM system of a large-scale structure generates a massive amount of data in different formats continuously on a
daily, weekly and monthly basis. However, all current SHM systems are operated manually by practitioners or
researchers for data processing, structural analysis and safety assessment. Algorithms for automatically analysing the
massive data received from the SHM system and assessing the structural conditions are lacking. These require close col-
laboration from interdisciplinary expertise in civil, mechanical and electrical engineering and computer science for full
adaptation of innovation technologies, which cover topics of sensory, communication, data science, system identifica-
tion, structural engineering and computational methods.

ACK NO WLE DGE MEN TS

The work described in this paper was partially supported by the funding for Projects of Strategic Importance of The
Hong Kong Polytechnic University (Project Code: 1-ZE1F), the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, China (Project No. PolyU 152621/16E), and the Education Department of Fujian Province
(Project No. JAT160080).

ORCID
Jiazhan Su https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8720-481X
Yong Xia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5319-5858
Shun Weng https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9093-607X
20 of 24 SU ET AL.

R EF E RE N C E S
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper
2. Brownjohn JMW, Pan TC. Identifying loading and response mechanisms from ten years of performance monitoring of a tall building.
J Performance Constructed Facilities. 2008;22(1):24-34.
3. Sumitro S, Wang ML. Sustainable structural health monitoring system. Struct Control Health Monit. 2005;12(3–4):445-467.
4. Zhou LR, Yan GR, Wang L, Ou JP. Review of benchmark studies and guidelines for structural health monitoring. Adv Struct Eng. 2013;
16(7):1187-1206.
5. Mesquita E, Antunes P, Coelho F, André P, Arêde A, Varum H. Global overview on advances in structural health monitoring plat-
forms. J Civil Struct Health Monitor. 2016;6(3):461-475.
6. Brownjohn JMW. Structural health monitoring of civil infrastructure. Philos Trans Royal Soc. A. 2007;365:589-622.
7. Sohn H, Farrar CR, Hemez FM, Shunk DD, Stinemates DW, Nadler BR. A review of structural health monitoring literature from
1996–2001. Los Alamos National Laboratory Report, LA-13976MS. 2004.
8. Ko JM, Ni YQ. Technology developments in structural health monitoring of large-scale bridges. Eng Struct. 2005;27(12):1715-1725.
9. Li H, Ou JP. The state of the art in structural health monitoring of cable-stayed bridges. J Civil Struct Health Monitor. 2016;6(1):43-67.
10. Matteo V, Rasa RP, John A. Railway bridge structural health monitoring and fault detection: state-of-the-art methods and future chal-
lenges. Struct Health Monitor. 2018;17(4):971-1007.
11. Xu YL, Xia Y. Structural Health Monitoring of Long-Span Suspension Bridges. London: Spon Press; 2012.
12. Zhou GD, Yi TH. Thermal load in large-scale bridges: a state-of-the-art review. Int J Distributed Sensor Networks. 2013;9(12):1-17, 217983.
13. Ni YQ, Xia Y, Liao WY, Ko JM. Technology innovation in developing the structural health monitoring system for Guangzhou New TV
Tower. Struct Control Health Monit. 2009;16(1):73-98.
14. Bao YQ, Chen ZC, Wei SY, Xu Y, Tang ZY, Li H. The state of the art of data science and engineering in structural health monitoring.
Engineering. 2019;5(2):234-242.
15. Huang HB, Yi TH, Li HN. Bayesian combination of weighted principal component analysis for diagnosing sensor faults in structural
monitoring systems. J Eng Mech. 2017;143(9):1-16, 04017088.
16. Yi TH, Li HN, Gu M. A new method for optimal selection of sensor location on a high-rise building using simplified finite element
model. Struct Eng Mech. 2011;37(6):671-684.
17. Liu T, Yang B, Zhang QL. Health monitoring system developed for Tianjin 117 high-rise building. J Aerospace Eng. 2017;30(2):1-13,
B4016004.
18. Li QS, He YH, Zhou K, Han XL, He YC, Shu ZR. Structural health monitoring for a 600 m high skyscraper. Struct Design Tall Spec
Build. 2018;27(12):1-22, e1490.
19. Huang MJ, Shakal AF. Structure instrumentation in the California strong motion instrumentation program. Strong Motion Instr Civil
Eng Struct. 2001;373:17-31.
20. Li QS, Fang JQ, Jeary AP, Wong CK, Liu DK. Evaluation of wind effects on a supertall building based on full-scale measurements.
Earthq Eng Structur Dynamics. 2000;29(12):1845-1862.
21. Fu JY, Li QS, Wu JR, Xiao YQ, Song LL. Field measurements of boundary layer wind characteristics and wind-induced responses of
super-tall buildings. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2008;96(8-9):1332-1358.
22. Fu JY, Wu JR, Xu A, Li QS, Xiao YQ. Full-scale measurements of wind effects on Guangzhou West Tower. Eng Struct. 2012;35:120-139.
23. Li QS, Xiao YQ, Wong CK, Jeary AP. Field measurements of typhoon effects on a super tall building. Eng Struct. 2004;26(2):233-244.
24. He YH, Li QS, Zhu HP, Han XL, He YC, Li X. Monitoring of structural modal parameters and dynamic responses of a 600m-high sky-
scraper during a typhoon. Struct Design Tall Spec Build. 2017;27(6):1-15, e1456.
25. Li QS, Xiao YQ, Fu JY, Li ZN. Full-scale measurements of wind effects on Jin Mao building. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2007;
95(6):445-466.
26. Li QS, Li X, He YC. Monitoring wind characteristics and structural performance of a supertall building during a landfall typhoon.
J Structu Eng. 2016;142(11):1-16, 04016097.
27. Li QS, Zhi LH, Tuan AY, Kao CS, Su SC, Wu CF. Dynamic behavior of Taipei 101 Tower: field measurement and numerical analysis.
J Structu Eng. 2010;137(1):143-155.
28. Xia Y, Ni YQ, Zhang P, Liao WY, Ko JM. Stress development of a super-tall structure during construction: field monitoring and numer-
ical analysis. Comput Aided Civ Inf Eng. 2011;26(7):542-559.
29. Zhu HP, Gao K, Xia Y, et al. Multi-rate data fusion for dynamic displacement measurement of beam-like supertall structures using
acceleration and strain sensors. Struct Health Monitor. 2020;19(2):520-536.
30. Abdelrazaq A. Validating the structural behavior and response of Burj Khalifa: synopsis of the full scale structural health monitoring
programs. Int J High-Rise Buildings. 2012;1(1):37-51.
31. Su JZ, Xia Y, Chen L, et al. Long-term structural performance monitoring system for the Shanghai Tower. J Civil Struct Health Monitor.
2013;3(1):49-61.
32. Shi WX, Shan JZ, Lu XL. Modal identification of Shanghai World Financial Center both from free and ambient vibration response. Eng
Struct. 2012;36:14-26.
33. Gao F, Chen P, Xia Y, Zhu HP, Weng S. Efficient calculation and monitoring of temperature actions on supertall structures. Eng Struct.
2019;193:1-11.
SU ET AL. 21 of 24

34. Brincker R, Zhang L, Andersen P. Modal identification of output-only systems using frequency domain decomposition. Smart Mater
Struct. 2001;10(3):441-445.
35. Dong YF, Li YM, Xiao MK, Lai M. Analysis of earthquake ground motions using an improved Hilbert–Huang transform. Soil Dyn
Earthq Eng. 2008;28(1):7-19.
36. Peeters B, Roeck GD. Stochastic system identification for operational modal analysis: a review. J Dynamic Syst, Measurement, Control.
2001;123(4):659-667.
37. Huang ZF, Gu M. Envelope random decrement technique for identification of nonlinear damping of tall buildings. J Structu Eng. 2016;
142(11):1-12, 04016101.
38. Xu YL, Chen SW, Zhang RC. Modal identification of Di Wang building under typhoon York using the Hilbert-Huang transform
method. Struct Design Tall Spec Build. 2003;12(1):21-47.
39. Li ZJ, Park HS, Adeli H. New method for modal identification of super high-rise building structures using discretised synchrosqueezed
wavelet and Hilbert transforms. Struct Design Tall Spec Build. 2017;26(3):1-16, e1312.
40. Hughes JB, Moulding KW. Recent advances in switched-current filters. Analog Circuit Des. 1995;187-201.
41. Saramaki T. A class of window functions with nearly minimum sidelobe energy for designing FIR filters. In Proceedings of IEEE Inter-
national Symposium on Circuits and Systems, USA, Portland 1989.
42. Amezquita-Sanchez JP, Adeli H. Signal processing techniques for vibration-based health monitoring of smart structures. Archiv Comput
Meth Eng. 2016;23(1):1-15.
43. Lei Y, Zhou H, Lai ZL. A computationally efficient algorithm for real-time tracking the abrupt stiffness degradations of structural ele-
ments. Comput Aided Civ Inf Eng. 2016;31(6):465-480.
44. Amezquita-Sanchez JP, Adeli H. Synchrosqueezed wavelet transform-fractality model for locating, detecting, and quantifying damage
in smart highrise building structures. Smart Mater Struct. 2015;24(6):1-14, 065034.
45. Tsogka C, Daskalakis E, Comanducci G, Ubertini F. The stretching method for vibration-based structural health monitoring of civil
structures. Comput Aided Civ Inf Eng. 2017;32(4):288-303.
46. Weng S, Xia Y, Xu YL, Zhu HP. Substructure based approach to finite element model updating. Comput Struct. 2011;89(9–10):772-782.
47. Weng S, Xia Y, Zhou XQ, Xu YL, Zhu HP. Inverse substructure method for model updating of structures. J Sound Vib. 2012;331(25):
5449-5468.
48. Weng S, Zhu HP, Xia Y, Mao L. Damage detection using the eigenparameter decomposition of substructural flexibility matrix. Mechan-
ical Syst Signal Processing. 2013;34(1–2):19-38.
49. Satake N, Yokota H. Evaluation of vibration properties of high-rise steel buildings using data of vibration tests and earthquake observa-
tions. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 1996;59(2–3):265-282.
50. Tamura Y, Matsui M, Pagnini LC, Ishibashi R, Yoshida A. Measurement of wind-induced response of buildings using RTK-GPS.
J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2002;90(12–15):1783-1793.
51. Li XJ, Ge LL, Ambikairajah E, Rizos C, Tamura Y, Yoshida A. Full-scale structural monitoring using an integrated GPS and accelerom-
eter system. GPS Solutions. 2006;10(4):233-247.
52. Lynch JP. Design of a wireless active sensing unit for localised structural health monitoring. Struct Control Health Monit. 2005;12(3–4):
405-423.
53. Çelebi M, Safak E. Seismic response of Transamerica building. I: data and preliminary analysis. J Structu Eng. 1991;117(8):389-2404.
54. Çelebi M. Seismic response of eccentrically braced tall building. J Structu Eng. 1993;119(4):1188-1205.
55. Safak E. Response of a 42-storey steel-frame building to the Ms = 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake. Eng Struct. 1993;15(6):403-422.
56. Celebi M, Safak E. Seismic response of Pacific Park plaza. I: data and preliminary analysis. J Structu Eng. 1992;118(6):1547-1565.
57. Brownjohn JMW. Lateral loading and response for a tall building in the non- seismic doldrums. Eng Struct. 2005;27(12):1801-1812.
58. Pan TC, Brownjohn JMW, You XT. Correlating measured and simulated dynamic responses of a tall building to long-distance earth-
quakes. Earthq Eng Structur Dynamics. 2004;33(5):611-632.
59. Lin CC, Wang CE, Wu HW, Wang JF. On-line building damage assessment based on earthquake records. Smart Mater Struct. 2005;
14(3):137-153.
60. Shi C, Lou Y, Zhang H, et al. Seismic deformation of the Mw 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake from high-rate GPS observations. Adv Space
Res. 2010;46(2):228-235.
61. Gu M, Quan Y. Across-wind loads of typical tall buildings. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2004;92(13):1147-1165.
62. Quan Y, Gu M, Tamura Y. Experimental evaluation of aerodynamic damping of square super high-rise buildings. Wind and Structures.
2005;8(5):309-324.
63. Zhou Y, Kareem A, Gu M. Equivalent static buffeting loads on structures. J Structu Eng. 2000;126(8):989-992.
64. Kim YM, You KP. Dynamic responses of a tapered tall building to wind loads. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2002;90(1):1771-1782.
65. Kim Y, Kanda J. Characteristics of aerodynamic forces and pressures on square plan buildings with height variations. J Wind Eng
Industr Aerodynamics. 2010;98(8–9):449-465.
66. Li QS, Fu JY, Xiao YQ, et al. Wind tunnel and full-scale study of wind effects on China's tallest building. Eng Struct. 2006;28(12):
1745-1758.
67. Kijewski-Correa T, Kilpatrick J, Kareem A, et al. Validating the wind-induced response of tall buildings: a synopsis of the Chicago full-
scale monitoring program. J Structu Eng. 2006;132(10):1509-1523.
22 of 24 SU ET AL.

68. Abdelrazaq A, Kijewski-Correa T, Song YH, Case P, Isyumov N, Kareem A. Design and full-scale monitoring of the tallest building in
Korea: Tower Palace III. In Proceedings of 6th Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, Korea, Seoul 2005.
69. Ohtake K, Mataki Y, Ohkuma T, Kanda J, Kitamura H. Full-scale measurements of wind actions on Chiba Port Tower. J Wind Eng
Industr Aerodynamics. 1992;43(1–3):2225-2236.
70. Tamura Y, Kohsaka R, Nakamura O, Miyashita K, Modi VJ. Wind-induced responses of an airport tower-efficiency of tuned liquid
damper. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 1996;65(1–3):121-131.
71. Balendra T, Ma Z, Tan CL. Design of tall residential buildings in Singapore for wind effects. Wind Struct. 2003;6(3):221-248.
72. Xie ZN, Gu M. Across-wind dynamic response of high-rise building under wind action with interference effects from one and two tall
buildings. Struct Des Tall Special Buildings. 2009;18(1):37-57.
73. Yi TH, Li HN, Gu M. Recent research and applications of GPS-based monitoring technology for high-rise structures. Struct Control
Health Monit. 2013;20(5):649-670.
74. Lovse JW, Teskey WF, Lachapelle G, Cannon ME. Dynamic deformation monitoring of tall structure using GPS technology. J Survey
Eng. 1995;121(1):35-40.
75. Ogaja C, Wang JJ, Rizos C. Detection of wind-induced response by wavelet transformed GPS solutions. J Surveying Eng. 2003;129(3):
99-104.
76. Park HS, Shon HG, Kim IS, Park JH. Application of GPS to monitoring of wind-induced responses of high-rise buildings. Struct Des
Tall Special Buildings. 2008;17(1):117-132.
77. Yi J, Zhang JW, Li QS. Dynamic characteristics and wind-induced responses of a super-tall building during typhoons. J Wind Eng
Industr Aerodynamics. 2013;121(5):116-130.
78. Kijewski-Correa T, Pirnia JD. Dynamic behavior of tall buildings under wind: insights from full-scale monitoring. Struct Design Tall
Spec Build. 2007;16(4):471-486.
79. Yi J, Li QS. Wind tunnel and full-scale study of wind effects on a super-tall building. J Fluids Struct. 2015;58:236-253.
80. Li QS, Zhi LH, Yi J, To A, Xie MJ. Monitoring of typhoon effects on a super-tall building in Hong Kong. Struct Control Health Monit.
2014;21(6):926-949.
81. He YH, Han XL, Li QS, Zhu HP, He CY. Monitoring of wind effects on 600 m high Ping-An Finance Center during Typhoon Haima.
Eng Struct. 2018;167:308-326.
82. Su JZ, Xia Y, Zhu LD, Zhu HP, Ni YQ. Typhoon- and temperature-induced quasi-static responses of a supertall structure. Eng Struct.
2017;143:91-100.
83. Bentz A, Kijewski-Correa T. Wind-induced vibrations of tall buildings: the role of full-scale observations in better quantifying habitabil-
ity. IMAC XXVII. A Conference and Exposition on Structural Dynamics, Orlando, Florida 2009.
84. AIJES-V001–2004. Guidelines for the evaluation of habitability to building vibration. Architectural Institute of Japan Recommenda-
tions. Tokyo, Japan, 2004.
85. Kanda J, Tamura Y, Nakamura O, Uesu K. Probabilistic criteria for serviceability limit of wind response. Proceedings of International
Colloquium on Structural Serviceability of Buildings, IABSE Reports, Goteborg, Sweden. 1993;69:59-66.
86. Tamura Y, Kawana S, Nakamura O, Kanda J, Nakada S. Evaluation perception of wind-induced vibration in buildings. In Proceedings
of Institution of Civil Engineers, Structures and Buildings. 2006;159(5):283-293.
87. Bashor R, Kareem A. Probabilistic performance evaluation of buildings: an occupant comfort perspective. Proceeding of the 12th Inter-
national Conference on Wind Engineering, Cairns, Australia. 2007;2:1335-1342.
88. Burton MD, Kwok KCS, Hitchcock RA, Denoon RO. Frequency dependence of human response to wind-induced building motion.
J Structu Eng. 2006;132(2):296-303.
89. ISO 10137:2007(E). Bases for design of structures-serviceability of buildings and walkways against vibration. International Standard.
Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
90. Campbell S, Kwok KCS, Hitchcock RA. Dynamic characteristics and wind-induced response of two high-rise residential buildings dur-
ing typhoons. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 2005;93(6):461-482.
91. Campbell S, Kwok KCS, Hitchcock RA, Tse KT, Leung HY. Field measurements of natural periods of vibration and structural damping
of wind-excited tall residential buildings. Wind Struct. 2007;10(5):401-420.
92. Liao WY. Comfort assessment of tower-like slender structures under typhoons and earthquakes. Ph.D. thesis, 2012.
93. Xia Y, Zhang P, Ni YQ, Zhu HP. Deformation monitoring of a super-tall structure using real-time strain data. Eng Struct. 2014;67:29-38.
94. EN 1991-1-5. Eurocode 1: actions on structures-Part 1–5: general actions-thermal actions. Brussels, Belgium CEN, 2003.
95. GB 50009–2012. Load code for the design of building structures, Beijing, China 2012.
96. Xia Y, Xu YL, Wei ZL, Zhu HP, Zhou XQ. Variation of structural vibration characteristics versus non-uniform temperature distribution.
Eng Struct. 2011;33(1):146-153.
97. Kennedy J, Soliman M. Temperature distributions in composite bridges. J Structu Eng. 1987;113(3):65-78.
98. Zhou LR, Xia Y, Brownjohn JMW, Koo KY. Temperature analysis of a long-span suspension bridge based on field monitoring and
numerical simulation. J Bridge Eng. 2016;21(1):1-10, 040150275.
99. Xia Y, Chen B, Zhou XQ, Xu YL. Field monitoring and numerical analysis of Tsing Ma suspension bridge temperature behavior. Struct
Control Health Monit. 2013;20(4):560-575.
100. Liu HB, Chen ZH, Zhou T. Investigation on temperature distribution and thermal behavior of large span steel structures considering
solar radiation. Int J Adv Steel Construction. 2013;9(1):41-58.
SU ET AL. 23 of 24

101. Abid SR, Mussa F, Tayşi N, Özakça M. Experimental and finite element investigation of temperature distributions in concrete—encased
steel girders. Struct Control Health Monit. 2017;25(1):1-23, e2042.
102. Emanuel ST, Mário P, Joaquim F. Structural response of a concrete cable-stayed bridge under thermal loads. Eng Struct. 2018;176:
652-672.
103. Khan FR, Nassetta AF. Temperature effects on tall steel framed buildings part 3—design considerations. National Eng Conference AISC.
1970;7(4):121-131.
104. McLaughlin ER. Temperature effects on tall steel framed buildings part 1—response of steel columns to temperature exposure.
National Eng Conference AISC. 1970;7(4):105-109.
105. West HH, Kar AK. Temperature effects on tall steel framed buildings part 2—structural analysis. National Eng Conference AISC. 1970;
7(4):110-120.
106. Pirner M, Fischer O. Long-time observation of wind and temperature effects on TV towers. J Wind Eng Industr Aerodynamics. 1999;
79(1–2):1-9.
107. Seco A, Tirapu F, Ramirez F, Garcia B, Cabrejas J. Cabrejas, assessing building displacement with GPS. Build Environ. 2007;42(1):
393-399.
108. Breuer P, Chmielewski T, Gorski P, Konopka E, Tarczynski L. The Stuttgart TV Tower-displacement of the top caused by the effects of
sun and wind. Eng Struct. 2008;30(10):2771-2781.
109. Ni YQ, Zhang P, Ye XW, Lin KC, Liao WY. Modeling of temperature distribution in a reinforced concrete supertall structure based on
structural health monitoring data. Comp Concrete. 2011;8(3):293-309.
110. Su JZ, Xia Y, Ni YQ, Zhou LR. Field monitoring and numerical simulation on thermal actions of a supertall structure. Struct Control
Health Monit. 2017;24(4):1-23, e1900.
111. Hu YD, Hou RR, Xia Q, Xia Y. Temperature-induced displacement of supertall structures: a case study. Adv Struct Eng. 2019;22(4):
982-996.
112. Salawu OS. Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Eng Struct. 1997;19(9):718-723.
113. Xu YL, Chen B, Ng CL, Wong KY, Chan WY. Monitoring temperature effect on a long suspension bridge. Struct Control Health Monit.
2010;17:632-653.
114. Xu ZD, Wu Z. Simulation of the effect of temperature variation on damage detection in a long-span cable-stayed bridge. Struct Health
Monitor. 2007;6(3):177-189.
115. Ding YL, Li AQ. Temperature-induced variations of measured modal frequencies of steel box girder for a long-span suspension bridge.
Int J Steel Structures. 2011;11(2):145-155.
116. Mosavi AA, Seracino R, Rizkalla S. Effect of temperature on daily modal variability of a steel-concrete composite bridge. J Bridge Eng.
2012;17(6):979-983.
117. Mao JX, Wang H, Feng DM, Tao TY, Zheng WZ. Investigation of dynamic properties of long-span cable-stayed bridges based on one-
year monitoring data under normal operating condition. Struct Control Health Monit. 2018;25(5):1-19, e2146.
118. He H, Wang W, Zhang X. Frequency modification of continuous beam bridge based on co-integration analysis considering the effect of
temperature and humidity. Struct Health Monitor. 2019;18(2):376-389.
119. Nayeri RD, Masri SF, Ghanem RG, Nigbor RL. A novel approach for the structural identification and monitoring of a full-scale 17-story
building based on ambient vibration measurements. Smart Mater Struct. 2008;17:1-19.
120. Yuen KV, Kuok SC. Ambient interference in long-term monitoring of buildings. Eng Struct. 2010;32(8):2379-2386.
121. Faravelli L, Ubertini F, Fuggini C. System identification of a super high-rise building via a stochastic subspace approach. Smart Struct
Syst. 2011;7(2):133-152.
122. Xia Y, Chen B, Weng S, Ni YQ, Xu YL. Temperature effect on vibration properties of civil structures: a literature review and case stud-
ies. J Civil Struct Health Monitoring. 2012;2(1):29-46.
123. Xia Y, Hao H, Zanardo G, Deeks AJ. Long term vibration monitoring of a RC slab: temperature and humidity effect. Eng Struct. 2006;
28(3):441-452.
124. Bast WD, McDonnell TR, Parker L, Shanks SP. Measured shortening and its effects in a Chicago high-rise building. In Proceedings of
the Third Forensic Engineering Congress, USA, San Diego 2003.
125. Yang WJ, Lee JH, Yi WH. Development of the neural network algorithm for the prediction of column shortening in high-rise buildings.
Adv Struct Eng. 2012;15(3):509-524.
126. Jayasinghe MTR, Jayasena WMVPK. Effect of axial shortening of columns on design and construction of tall reinforced concrete build-
ings. Pract Periodic Structu Des Construction. 2004;9(2):70-78.
127. Fan F, Wang HJ, Zhi XD, Huang G, Zhu EC, Wang H. Investigation of construction vertical deformation and pre-deformation control
for three super high-rise buildings. Adv Struct Eng. 2013;16(11):1885-1898.
128. Xiang ZF. Bridge Construction Control Technique. Beijing: China Communications Press; 2007.
129. Moragaspitiya P, Thambiratnam D, Perera N, Chan T. A numerical method to quantify differential axial shortening in concrete build-
ings. Eng Struct. 2010;32(8):2310-2317.
130. Park HS. Optimal compensation of differential column shortening in high-rise buildings. Struct Des Tall Special Buildings. 2003;12(1):
49-66.
131. Park SW, Choi SW, Park HS. Moving average correction method for compensation of differential column shortening in high-rise build-
ings. Struct Des Tall Special Buildings. 2013;22(9):718-728.
24 of 24 SU ET AL.

132. Aktan AE, Bergmeister K, Bucher C, et al. Monitoring and safety evaluation of existing concrete structures, Ceb-Fib State-of-art report
2003.
133. Yi TH, Li HN, Zhao XY. Noise smoothing for structural vibration test signals using an improved wavelet thresholding technique. Sen-
sors. 2012;12(8):11205-11220.
134. Su JZ, Xia Y, Xu YL, Zhao X, Zhang QL. Settlement monitoring of a supertall building using the Kalman filtering technique and for-
ward construction stage analysis. Adv Struct Eng. 2014;17(6):881-893.
135. Fuhr PL, Huston DR, Kajenski PJ, Ambrose TP. Performance and health monitoring of the Stafford medical building using embedded
sensors. Smart Mater Struct. 1992;1(1):63-68.
136. Ye XW, Ni YQ, Xia YX. Distributed strain sensor networks for in-construction monitoring and safety evaluation of a high-rise building.
Int J Distributed Sensor Networks. 2012;8(9):1-13, 685054.
137. Glisic B, Inaudi D, Lau JM, Fong CC. Ten-year monitoring of high-rise building columns using long-gauge fiber optic sensors. Smart
Mater Struct. 2013;22(5):1-15, 055030.
138. Li HN, Ren L, Jia ZG, Yi TH, Li DS. State-of-the-art in structural health monitoring of large and complex civil infrastructures. J Civil
Struct Health Monitor. 2016;6(1):3-16.
139. ISIS design manual no. 2: guidelines for structural health monitoring, ISIS Canada, 2001.
140. ISO 18649: 2004: Mechanical vibration-evaluation of measurement results from dynamic tests and investigations on bridges, 2004.
141. Aktan AE, Catbas FN, Grimmelsman KA, Pervizpour M. Development of a model health monitoring guide for major bridges,
CONTRACT/ORDER NO. DTFH61-01-P-00347. Federal Highway Administration Research and Development, 2002.
142. Bergmeister K. Monitoring and safety evaluation of existing concrete structures: state-of-the-art report, Fib Task Group 5.1, 2002.
143. Rücker W, Hille F, Rohrmann R. F08b: guideline for structural health monitoring. SAMCO, Berlin, Germany: Federal Institute of Mate-
rials Research and Testing (BAM); 2006.
144. CECS 333: 2012. Design standard for structural health monitoring systems, Beijing, China 2012.
145. GB 50982–2014. Technical code for monitoring of building and bridge structures, Beijing, China 2014.
146. JT/T 1037–2016. Technical specification for structural safety monitoring systems of highway bridges, Beijing, China 2016.
147. T/CECS 505–2018. Standard for testing and monitoring on structural vibrations using fiber grating sensors, Beijing, China 2018.
148. T/CECS 529–2018. Early warning threshold standard for structural health monitoring system of longspan bridges, Beijing, China 2018.
149. Li QS, Zhi LH, Tuan AY, Kao CS, Su SC, Wu CF. Dynamic behavior of Taipei 101 Tower: field measurement and numerical analysis.
J Structu Eng. 2011;137(1):143-155.

How to cite this article: Su J, Xia Y, Weng S. Review on field monitoring of high-rise structures. Struct Control
Health Monit. 2020;e2629. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.2629