118_ftp | Wavelet | Mathematical Optimization

STRUCTURAL CONTROL AND HEALTH MONITORING Struct. Control Health Monit.

2006; 13:472–487 Published online 15 December 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/stc.118

Damage detection in Euler–Bernoulli beams via spatial wavelet analysis
Pol D. Spanos1,*,y, Giuseppe Failla2,z,k, Adolfo Santini2,},ÃÃ and Massimiliano Pappatico2,},yy
1

George R. Brown School of Engineering, L. B. Ryon Chair in Engineering, Rice University, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251, U.S.A. 2 Dipartimento di Meccanica e Materiali, Universita` ‘Mediterranea’ di Reggio Calabria, ` Localita Graziella Feo di Vito, 89060 Reggio Calabria, Italy

SUMMARY A spatial wavelet transform (WT) is used for damage detection in Euler–Bernoulli beams subject to static loads. It is shown that by applying the WT on the difference between the displacement responses of the damaged and the undamaged beams for various loading conditions, boundary effects are eliminated and damage-related local maxima are clearly identified in the WT modulus map. Estimates of damage locations and amplitudes are then obtained by two separate optimization procedures, in which each damaged section is modelled by an equivalent ‘reduced-stiffness’ spring. The effectiveness of the method is assessed using digitally-simulated data obtained via cubic interpolation on a finite number of nodal displacements. In this context, results pertaining to multi-crack beams prove quite accurate even for small damage amplitudes. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS:

damage detection; static displacement response; wavelet analysis

1. INTRODUCTION Originally developed for seismic records processing [1, 2], wavelet analysis has now become an important tool in a plethora of engineering applications, including time–frequency analysis of random processes, random field simulation, system identification, damage detection, and

*Correspondence to: Pol D. Spanos, George R. Brown School of Engineering, L. B. Ryon Chair in Engineering, Rice University, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251, U.S.A. y E-mail: spanos@rice.edu z E-mail: gfailla@ing.unirc.it } E-mail: adolfo.santini@unirc.it } E-mail: massimiliano.pappatico@unirc.it k Researcher. ÃÃ Full Professor. yy Ph.D. Student. Contract/grant sponsor: NSF Contract/grant sponsor: M.I.U.R.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 30 May 2005 Revised 6 September 2005

Based on these preliminary results. only numerical modes have been considered. have become preferable over the last decade. [13]. have provided further insight into the correlation existing between damagerelated singularities and local maxima of the WT modulus. represent a non-negligible limitation of the approach. and the only local maxima retained are those related to damaged sections in the central Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. are most commonly employed. the inequality n5a must hold. Also. The results obtained by Hong et al. even if no damaged section is located therein. the WT may be used in conjunction with non-destructive tests to estimate the damage state. is to build a WT where boundary local maxima do not appear. Securing signals with a sufficient resolution is certainly a crucial issue when implementing spatial wavelet analysis. depending on the wavelettransformed function. Early studies. Various methods have been formulated in this context. Struct. where a is the damage-related Lipschitz singularity index. Hong et al. local features and transient phenomena which cannot be detected by conventional methods such as the traditional Fourier analysis may be captured by the WT. however. Another interesting method involving the vibration modes of a multi-crack beam has been devised by Chang and Chen [17] who have used the WT local maxima to determine the position of the cracks. 13:472–487 . relevant for any function defined on a finite interval. An attempt in this regard has been made by Okafor and Dutta [12] who have used a least-square regression analysis to correlate the damage amplitude in cantilever beams with the WT of experimental modes recorded by a laser vibrometer. exhibit asymptotically-decaying amplitudes across the WT scales. Ltd. Gentile and Messina [18] have proposed to eliminate boundary local maxima by applying the WT on windowed vibration modes. The result sought in Reference [18]. Indeed. have shown that a damaged section corresponds to local maxima in the WT of the vibration modes. Next Hong et al. That is. In a later work. For multi-crack beams flexural waves induced by an impact hammer have been considered [6. which can be readily acquired via standard modal analysis. they have shown that WT modulus local maxima. and experimental natural frequencies to predict the crack depths via the characteristic equation. First Liew and Wang [11]. methods where the WT is applied on spatial signals. Later. 7]. For this reason methods based on vibration modes. have also devised a method to estimate the damage amplitude. or Lamb waves [10]. its evolution in time. A proper wavelet family for this task must have an adequate number of vanishing moments n. associated with a damaged section. Control Health Monit. 2006. visual inspection of the WT modulus and phase has been used to localize a fault [5]. However. wavelet analysis has been extended to damage detection in structural components. who have studied a simply-supported beam with a single non-propagating crack. who have applied the WT to the first experimental mode of a single-crack cantilever beam. Specifically. and for delaminated composites. have shown that transient vibrations due to developing damage can be disclosed by the local maxima of the WT mean-square map [4]. vibration response [8]. which decay to zero at the beam ends. acoustic emission waves generated by low-velocity impact loads [9]. [15]. based on the concept of Lipschitz singularity [14]. and its propagation in space. For damage detection in beams. Haase and Widjajakusuma [16] have proposed a fast algorithm to determine the WT maxima lines. Within this framework. who have applied the WT to the experimental modes of a free–free beam. have been confirmed by Douka et al. either static displacement responses or vibration modes. primarily devoted to fault diagnosis in machineries. and no estimate of the damage amplitude has been provided in Reference [11]. These boundary effects.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 473 material characterization [3]. since no reliable diagnosis can be formulated on the damage state at the beam ends. Chang and Chen have also pointed out that the WT may exhibit local maxima at the beam ends. In damage detection applications.

A complementary approach is adopted for multi-crack beams where damage amplitudes may differ significantly. part of the beam. Note that scarce contributions may be found in the literature on damage detection via wavelet analysis of beam static displacements. This short paper focuses on spatial wavelet analysis applied on data pertaining to the static displacement of Euler–Bernoulli cracked beams. Estimates of damage parameters are then obtained via two separate optimization problems. the dilated wavelet aÀ1/2c(x/a) is highly concentrated at x ¼ 0 and the WT displays the small-scale features of the function f(x). Control Health Monit. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. remedies to boundary effects. In mathematical terms Z 1 Â Ã À1=2 Wf ða. important issues remain to be resolved. displaying the largescale features of the function f(x). [20] have shown that damage-related local maxima occur in the WT of the numerical displacement of beams with either vertical or embedded cracks. note that most studies have involved single-crack beams. b2R and the bar denotes complex conjugation. Ltd. for a damage of a specified amplitude [19]. in these references several critical aspects have not been discussed. Numerical tests are conducted on the (simulated) pseudo-experimental response of beams featuring up to three cracks.474 P. D. The second parameter. in this manner the WT cannot detect any damaged section located near the beam ends. based on a displacement solution for cracked beams recently proposed in Reference [21]. SPANOS ET AL. at various locations b. bÞ ¼ a f ðxÞc ðx À bÞ=a dx ð1Þ À1 where a2R+. b. beyond the considerable research effort devoted in the last decade on damage detection via spatial wavelets. Clearly then. 13:472–487 . Nevertheless. as a approaches +1. but the same amplitude has been considered for all damaged sections. WAVELET TRANSFORM The concept of WT was first introduced in References [1. and estimation of the damage amplitude. Obviously. It is found out that the WT modulus map discloses all damaged sections as long as the ratio between the damage amplitudes does not exceed a certain threshold. corresponds to a dilation or compression of the mother wavelet. the WT yields an increasingly coarser spatial resolution. into a twoparameter family of elementary functions. Obviously. A WT modulus map is built where boundary effects are eliminated and damage-related local maxima are clearly identifiable. each derived from a basic or mother wavelet. An estimate of the minimum number of measurement points to implement wavelet analysis has been also attempted. Wang and Deng [19] and later Quek et al. Equation (1) is generally referred to as continuous wavelet transform. 2. Struct. such as the applicability of the method on experimental data. the localization properties of the WT depend on the value of the parameter a. 2006. 2]. defines a shift of the mother wavelet along the x-domain. f ðxÞ 2 L2 ðRÞ. Further. cðxÞ: The first parameter. In the literature. It decomposes a function f(x) belonging to the set of finite-energy one-dimensional functions. featuring different orientation and width. However. a. Specifically. Multi-crack beams have been considered only in Reference [17]. and is generally referred to as the scale. As a approaches zero.

. where both a and b vary on a finite grid. q[2](x) and q[4](x) are a second. P ¼ 2 kN: The cross section is a square with h ¼ 5 cm: Be the damage parameters {x1 ¼ L=20. That is. Control Health Monit. have also been developed in conjunction with fast decomposition and reconstruction algorithms. compute the integral Z L  à À1=2 sðxÞc ðx À bÞ=a dx ð4Þ Ws ða. 3. Equation (1). the damage-related singularities in Equation (2) determine local maxima in the Ws ða. Z1 ¼ 0:1} and {x2 ¼ L=4. . Consider then the two-crack clamped–clamped (CC) beam shown in Figures 1(a)–2(a). where L ¼ 100 cm.1. ND ð3Þ As reported in References [13–15]. More details and relevant references may be found in Reference [3]. Based on Equation (3). bÞ. the stiffness of the ith crack-equivalent spring is given by kfi ¼ ð1 À ai AÞEI=ai [21]. E the material’s Young’s modulus. bÞ ¼ a 0 ð5Þ Struct. where a vertical crack is modelled via a reduced-stiffness equivalent spring. Equation (2). Ltd. To compute Ws ða. cj’s are four constants depending on the boundary conditions.and fourthorder primitive of the load q(x). U(xÀxi) is the Heaviside function. whose amplitude decays asymptotically across scales. Z2 ¼ 0:5}. the displacement response. measured in cm. be xi’s the locations of ND non-propagating vertical cracks. Following Reference [21]. and di’s the corresponding crack depths. Further. on the displacement response. Next apply the WT. is represented as ! ND q½4Š ðxÞ X q½2Š ðxi Þ ai 2 3 sðxÞ ¼ c1 þ c2 x þ c3 x þ c4 x þ þ 2c3 þ 6c4 xi þ ðx À xi ÞUðx À xi Þ EI EI 1 À ai A i¼1 ð2Þ In Equation (2). . 2006. 13:472–487 . bÞ modulus map. the Mexican Hat wavelet 2 cðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffi ðx2 À 1Þ expðÀx2 =2Þ 3p1=4 Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. PROPOSED IDENTIFICATION METHOD In this section a damage detection method is presented in conjunction with an Euler–Bernoulli cracked beam. À ð0:9=h À AÞ2Zi þ 0:9=h Zi ¼ di =h for i ¼ 1.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 475 Discrete versions of Equation (1). h the height and I the moment of inertia of its undamaged cross-section. . A ¼ 2:013 cmÀ1 . and ai’s are given in terms of the crack depths di’s by the formula ai ¼ ð0:9=h À AÞZ2 i 2Zi À Z2 i . 3. WT modulus map and boundary effects for beam deflection Denote by L the length of an Euler–Bernoulli cracked beam. E ¼ 210 GPa. Denote by q(x) an arbitrary applied load.

25 4 L/2 L/4 P 3. and (b) WT. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. the Ws ða. modulus contour map of the displacement response. The same wavelet family has been used in Reference [13].25 2 1. bÞ modulus map. modulus contour map of the displacement response.25 L/ 3 L/ 4 P 3.5 1. Equation (4).476 P.25 2 1. Figure 1(b) shows that. Struct. Recognize in Figure 2(b) that. no local maxima appear at x2 ¼ L=4 in the Ws ða.5 2. as a result of the low bending moment value at x2 ¼ L=4: Both issues (i)–(ii) are next addressed to formulate a reliable spatial wavelet identification method.5 1 3 0. for P applied at x ¼ L=2.5 1.5 0 P 1 0.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 (a) (b) b. 13:472–487 . Equation (2).5 L/ 20 L EI 2. with amplitude decaying across the scales. position Figure 1. for P applied at x ¼ L=3. x 10-3 1. 18]. It may be also observed that: (i) Local maxima with amplitude decaying across scales appear also near the beam end x ¼ L. and (b) WT.5 1 3 L / 20 L EI 0. (ii) Damage-related local maxima may not be visible depending on the position of the applied load. Ltd. Two-crack CC beam subject to a load P at x ¼ L=2: (a) geometry and bending moment diagram.5 a. 4 x 10-3 1. Equation (4). Two-crack CC beam subject to a load P at x ¼ L=3: (a) geometry and bending moment diagram.5 a. scale 0.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 (a) (b) b. bÞ modulus map exhibits local maxima at x1 ¼ L=20 and x2 ¼ L=4. D.75 0. Equation (2). position Figure 2.75 0.5 0 P 1 0. Control Health Monit. SPANOS ET AL. despite the fact that no damaged section is present [17. scale 0. 2006. is selected.

Equation (6).25 2 1. subject to the same load. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. modulus contour map. the WT Z uðxÞ ¼ c01 þ c02 x þ c03 x2 þ c04 x3 þ L Wd ða. 2006. bÞj ð10Þ k¼1 x 10-3 1. Z L Wu ða.5 1 0. bÞ À Wu ða. scale 0. bÞ modulus map. modulus contour map of the undamaged beam displacement response. bÞ ¼ aÀ1=2 uðxÞc½ðx À bÞ=aŠ dx ð6Þ 0 where q½4Š ðxÞ ð7Þ EI It is seen in Figure 3(a) that for P ¼ 2 kN applied at x ¼ L=3 boundary local maxima. position Figure 3. scale a.5 1. consider the WT of the undamaged beam displacement response u(x) to a load q(x). the WT modulus NC X ðkÞ Wtot ða. Two-crack CC beam of Figure 1(a): (a) WT.5 2. Thus. To this purpose.5 is introduced.5 1 0. bÞ ¼ Ws ða. Ltd. a certain number NC of loading conditions may be considered to build the WT modulus map.5 0.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 2 1. bÞ modulus k map. and the only local maxima with amplitude decaying across scales are those associated with the two damaged sections at x1 ¼ L=20 and x2 ¼ L=4: In a most general case. position (b) b. Equation (8). Control Health Monit.5 3 2. analogous to those in Figure 1(b).5 a.25 x 10-4 7.5 1 5 3 2. bÞ ¼ jWd ða. That is. bÞ ¼ aÀ1=2 ½sðxÞ À uðxފc½ðx À bÞ=aŠ dx ð8Þ 0 for c00 ¼ ck À c0k : Figure 3(b) shows that boundary effects are eliminated in the Wd ða. to ensure that all damaged sections are clearly displayed regardless of the selected load position. Equation (7). This fact suggests that boundary effects can be eliminated if the WT is applied on the difference between the displacement responses of the damaged and undamaged beam.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 477 First. Combining Equations (2) and (7) one finds that ! ND X q½2Š ðxi Þ ai 00 00 00 2 00 3 sðxÞ À uðxÞ ¼ c1 þ c2 x þ c3 x þ c4 x þ 2c3 þ 6c4 xi þ ðx À xi ÞUðx À xi Þ ð9Þ EI 1 À ai A i¼1 4 3.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 (a) b. Struct.5 4 3.75 0. and (b) WT. appear in the Wu ða. 13:472–487 .

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons.. where the symbol Wd ða.. Consider next a beam for which the end displacements and/or rotations are not restrained.. Equation (10)..5 a.25 4 P L/ 3 L/4 3.... and (b) WT.. 2006. contour map.5 0 5L/ 6 L/ 4 P 1 0.. bÞ denotes Wd ða. position (a) (b) Figure 4..5 2.5 1 3 L/ 20 L . EI 0. bÞ À Wu ða. Equation (8).. this means that for a cantilever and a simply-supported (SS) beam the extended displacement functions cantilever beam (free end at x ¼ L) ( ðkÞ s ðxÞ. bÞ ¼ aÀ1=2 ½sðkÞ ðxÞ À uðkÞ ðxފc½ðx À bÞ=aŠ dx ð11Þ 0 The symbols s (x) and u (x) in Equation (11) refer to the displacement responses (2) and (7).. Note in Figure 4(b) that all damage-related local maxima are clearly captured by Equation (10)...5 L/20 L EI 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 b. 13:472–487 .. ðkÞ se ðxÞ ¼ sðkÞ ðLÞ þ dsðkÞ =dxjx¼L Á ðx À LÞ. In this case boundary local maxima reflect the discontinuity of the displacement function and/or its first derivative at the beam ends. SPANOS ET AL.. Ltd. for the kth loading condition. for a given load q(k)(x).25 2 1. where a single load P ¼ 2 kN is applied at different positions equally-spaced along the beam.. D.75 0. Two-crack CC beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced positions: (a) geometry.5 1. Control Health Monit.. The approach devised for a CC beam can be then generalized by enforcing the continuity of the displacement function and/or its first derivative at the beam ends. consider then the NC ¼ 5 loading conditions described in Figure 4(a).. That is...478 P.... Struct.. bÞ ¼ WsðkÞ ða. Z L ðkÞ ðkÞ Wd ða.. For the two-crack beam in Figures 1(a)–2(a). scale 0. For instance..... ðkÞ can be introduced. bÞ. (k) (k) 04x4L ð12aÞ x5L L/ 6 L/ 4 P L/ 20 L EI x 10-3 1.

u(k)(x) defined on [0. position Figure 5. 04x4L ð12bÞ uðkÞ ðLÞ þ duðkÞ =dxjx¼L Á ðx À LÞ. 4 3. x5L ð12dÞ In this context. a two-crack SS beam of square cross-section.5 a. > > : ðkÞ ds =dxjx¼L Á ðx À LÞ. E ¼ 210 GPa.5 0. when NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced loads P ¼ 2 kN are applied individually on the beam.25 2 1. with L ¼ 100 cm. and (b) for se ðxÞ. Control Health Monit. > < ðkÞ se ðxÞ ¼ sðkÞ ðxÞ. Recognize that boundary effects are eliminated. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. x40 04x4L x5L ð12cÞ can be introduced to compute the WT in Equation (10). 2006.5 x10-3 1. position (b) b. scale a.25 1 3 2.5 1 0.5 0. 4/3L]. scale 0. uðkÞ ðxÞ defined by e Equations (12c) and (12d) on the dummy interval [ÀL/3. x5L 8 ðkÞ > ds =dxjx¼0 Á x.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 (a) b. Clearly. due to the discontinuity of the first derivative of both s(k)(x) and u(k)(x). and only damage-related amplitude-decreasing local maxima remain.5 1 0. Ltd. is considered.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 479 uðkÞ ðxÞ e simply-supported beam ¼ ( uðkÞ ðxÞ. 8 ðkÞ x40 > du =dxjx¼0 Á x.75 0. Figure 5(a) shows Equation (10) for s(k)(x) and u(k)(x) given by Equations (2) and (7).75 0. Struct. 04x4L > > : ðkÞ du =dxjx¼L Á ðx À LÞ.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 2 1.5 1 x 10-3 1.25 4 3.25 0. Be the damage parameters {x1 ¼ L=20. defined on the dummy interval [ÀL/3. Amplitudedecaying local maxima appear at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L. no damaged section may be detected at x1 ¼ L=20: Figure 5(b) shows Equation (10) when applied on the displacement responses (12c) and (12d). Z2 ¼ 0:1}. 4/3L]. L]. 13:472–487 .5 3 2. > < ðkÞ ðkÞ ue ðxÞ ¼ u ðxÞ.5 1. Z1 ¼ 0:1} and {x2 ¼ L=2. h¼ 5 cm. Equation (10) contour map for a two-crack SS beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 ðkÞ equally-spaced positions: (a) for s(k)(x).5 1.

# Denote by sðkÞ ðxÞ the experimental displacement response to the kth loading condition. Equation (15) does not involve the constant Ki. 2006. SPANOS ET AL. Figures 4(b) and 5(b) demonstrate that Equation (10) yields the exact location of the damaged sections when the theoretical displacement responses s(k)(x) are used. bÞj À jWh ða. when dealing with experimental data damage-related local maxima in Equation (10) may shift across scales. at each damaged section xi. xi þ Di Š ð14Þ where Di is small. bÞ ¼ a 0 ð15Þ By comparing Equation (15) with (13). in fact. Based on Equation (14). xi Þj À jWh ðaj . denote by NC X # W tot ða. and Wh(a. as no damage amplitude-related term is involved in Equation (15). unlike Equation (13). Ki ¼ ½2c3 þ 6c4 xi þ q½2Š ðxi Þ=EIŠai =ð1 À ai AÞ: Equation (13) may be readily derived by observing that. bÞ ¼ aÀ1=2 # # s d the counterparts of Equations (10) and (11). Also. Note that the computational effort involved in Equation (18) is quite small. the damage amplitudes may be estimated by seeking the optimal set of parameters Zi ’s that minimize the difference between the * Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. the approximation Z L À1=2 Wd ða. it is clear that Equation (14) attains its minimum value when b ¼ xi : Note also that.2. However. within a small but finite range. Damage location estimation P. The latter. In this case. 3.3. 13:472–487 . applies for all positions b and can be thus eliminated when computing the error function (14). in which Ki is a constant depending on the damage state of the beam. for each damaged section xi introduce the error function ei ða. bÞ ¼ W ðkÞ ða. Damage amplitude estimation Upon determining the damage locations by Equation (18). bÞ ¼ jW ðkÞ ða. xi Þ % Ki Á a ðx À xi ÞUðx À xi Þc½ðx À xi Þ=aŠ dx a ! 0 ð13Þ 0 holds. Also note that no a priori knowledge on the damage amplitudes is required. bÞ ¼ jjWd ða. Control Health Monit. Struct. bÞjj b 2 ½xi À Di .b) is given by Z L À1=2 ðx À bÞUðx À bÞc½ðx À bÞ=aŠ dx Wh ða. D. Next. an estimate of the damage locations becomes important. bÞ À Wu ða. xi Þjj * * ð18Þ min Pðxi Þ ¼ # * xi k¼1 j¼1 d Z L ½# s ðkÞ ðxÞ À uðkÞ ðxފc½ðx À bÞ=aŠ dx ð17Þ 0 where NAP is a certain number of scales aj introduced to smoothen the noise effects.480 3. the contribution of the singular part ðx À xi ÞUðx À xi Þ dominates over the contribution of the remaining terms involved in Equation (9). bÞj ð16Þ # k¼1 d and ðkÞ W ðkÞ ða. an estimate xi for each * damage location can be sought via the minimization problem NC NAP XX * jjW ðkÞ ðaj . First recognize that. since the damage locations xi * can be sought only within the vicinity of the local maxima of Equation (16). as the scale a ! 0 in Equation (8). Ltd.

given as random deviates of the corresponding theoretical ones [21. 22]. Z3 ¼ 0:3}. which is rather unlikely to happen in practice. where NAO is a number of scales aj . Consider then a three-crack CC beam of square cross-section. bm Þj À jWsðkÞ ðaj . That is. bm Þjj # ð19Þ is formulated. For this. as they are associated with wavelet functions of large spatial support as compared to the length of the beam. . L ðkÞ # for m ¼ 1. Struct.* ND Z min * Oð* 1 . 22]. It is worth noting that the proposed identification method has significant advantages as compared to alternative methods available in the literature [21–23]. and NB is a number of reference points selected along the total length of the beam. imply an a priori knowledge of the number of damaged sections.. ZND Þ ¼ Z NC NAO NB XXX k¼1 j¼1 m¼1 jjWsðkÞ ðaj . even for multi-crack beams. respectively. To m detect the damage-related local maxima in Equation (16). Clearly the exact number of damaged sections is estimated by Equation (16). . The latter are produced by a cubic interpolation on a finite number of M pseudo-measured displacements.. . given as Equation (2). . {x3 ¼ 3L=5.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 481 experimental data and the theoretical displacement responses s(k)(x). Z1 ¼ 0:1}. intuition suggests that both the sampling rate and the noise magnitude are critical. the two separate minimization problems posed by Equations (18) and (19) do not require a significant computational effort. NUMERICAL RESULTS ON PSEUDO-EXPERIMENTAL DATA 4. . however. Ltd. will be taken as parameters xi’s in the theoretical displacement responses s(k)(x) involved in Equation (19). Figures 6(a) and 7(a) describe Equation (16) for {M ¼ 10. r]. Methods such as those in References [21. Further.. Otherwise. 13:472–487 . Noise and discrete-sampling effects The effectiveness of the proposed method is next assessed using numerical data. should always be such * that the corresponding wavelet does not extend up to the next damaged section. 2. 2006. For this purpose high scales are always preferable. M ð20Þ sðkÞ ðxm Þ ¼ sðkÞ ðxm Þð1 þ rm Þ. . . compute Equation (16) for NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced loads P ¼ 2 kN applied individually on the beam.1. The damage locations xi . with L ¼ 100 cm. E ¼ 210 GPa: Be the damage parameters {x1 ¼ L=20. however.. Control Health Monit. Note that the range of the NAP/NAO scales in Equations (18) and (19) can be selected to minimize the noise effects. Also. they demand an almost prohibitive computational effort for multi-crack beams. 4. r ¼ 0:05} m in Equation (20). via a single optimization problem [21–23]. as a result of poor measurement sampling Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. The maximum scale involved in the functional Pðxi Þ. {x2 ¼ L=4. xm ¼ m Mþ1 where r(k)’s are independent random variables uniformly-distributed over an interval [Àr. Again. the following minimization problem: * Z1 . Z2 ¼ 0:8}. h ¼ 5 cm. It is seen that additional amplitude-decaying local maxima may appear at undamaged sections of the beam. estimated via the * minimization problem defined by Equation (18). the approximation by Equation (13) will not be reliable. since damage locations and amplitudes are estimated in conjunction. . rðkÞ ¼ 0} and {M ¼ 300.

5 3 x 10-3 3.5 1 0.5 0 a. when {M550.5 3 x 10-3 3. for fM ¼ 300. its effects may be ameliorated by performing a certain number of tests for each Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. position (b) b.5 2 1 1. as at x2 ¼ L=4: As far as poor sampling is concerned. Struct.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 (a) b. as at x1 ¼ L=20.5 1 2. scale 2 1.5 3 2. and noise magnitude (see Figure 7(a).5 3 4 3.5 0.5 a. D. 13:472–487 . 40. scale 0. (see Figure 6(a). rðkÞ ¼ 0:0g in Equation (20). x 10-3 3.5 2 1. its effects may be eliminated by increasing the number of base points M. position Figure 7. rm ¼ 0} is set in Equation (20).482 P. as long as a sufficient number of base points M is taken in Equation (20).5 1 0.5 a. position Figure 6.5 1 0. 90 cm). at the vicinity of x ¼ 10.5 1 0.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 2 1. and at severe levels of damage they may spread over a wider area. SPANOS ET AL.5 x 10-3 2 4 3. 2006. rðkÞ ¼ 0:0g m m in Equation (20). and (b) 30 tests for each loading condition.5 3 1. at the vicinity of x ¼ 45 cm). Control Health Monit.5 2 1.5 1 0. in Figure 6(a) it is apparent that local maxima corresponding to small levels of damage may not be visible. Equation (16) contour map for a three-crack CC beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced positions: (a) for fM ¼ 10. and (b) for fM550. Equation (16) contour map for a three-crack CC beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 equallyspaced positions. As far as noise magnitude is concerned.5 2. Ltd. Further. scale 2 1.5 2 1. Figure 6(b) shows in fact that only damage-related amplitude-decaying local maxima remain in Equation ðkÞ (16). r ¼ 0:05g in Equation (20): (a) 1 test for each loading condition.5 3 4 3. position (b) b. scale a. It may be then concluded that the cubic interpolation yields a displacement response almost identical to the theoretical one.5 2.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 (a) b.5 2.5 2.5 3 2. 4 3.

M Z (%) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 20 } 10 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 30 40 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 40 20 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 50 20 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100 20 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 150 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 200 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 250 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 300 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Table II. Figure 7(b) shows that only damage-related amplitude# decaying local maxima are retained in Equation (16). by which a resolution up to 512 Â 512 is achieved in a few mm2 [24]. Also small Table I. M Z (%) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 20 } } 30 20 10 10 5 5 1 30 } } 30 20 5 5 5 1 1 40 } } 20 20 5 5 5 1 1 50 } } 20 10 5 5 1 1 1 100 } 40 20 10 5 5 1 1 1 150 } 40 20 5 5 1 1 1 1 200 } 20 10 5 5 1 1 1 1 250 } 20 10 5 5 1 1 1 1 300 30 10 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. and NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced loads P ¼ 2 kN applied individually on the beam. 22]. for r ¼ 0:05 in Equation (20).DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 483 loading condition. In this context. when Z ¼ Zmin : As expected. Herein. M is taken within the range 20–300. Ltd. In References [21. Minimum number of tests for each loading condition to detect damage-related local maxima in Equation (16). the number of tests increases with r. the minimum number of tests may be evaluated to smoothen out additional amplitude-decaying local maxima in Equation (16). A great number of data. the results reported in Tables I and II refer to a beam of square cross section with L ¼ 100 cm. Various CC beams featuring up to three cracks have been considered. Minimum number of tests for each loading condition to detect damage-related local maxima in Equation (16). 2006. when the displacement responses sðkÞ ðxÞ are averaged over 30 tests for each loading condition. in fact. For this purpose. for r ¼ 0:01 in Equation (20). where the ratio between the largest and smallest damage amplitude is Zmax /Zmin 57:0: Specifically. Data in each row Z of Tables I and II indicate the minimum number of tests to detect all the cracks. E ¼ 210 GPa. the authors have computed the minimum number of loading tests to estimate the damage parameters with a certain accuracy. Control Health Monit. for given values of r and M in Equation (20). Laser scanning is also extremely fast and numerous tests may be conveniently performed. may be readily obtained using modern laser technology. and decreases with M. h ¼ 5 cm. 13:472–487 . Struct.

0545 0. Three-crack CC beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced positions. AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD FOR MULTI-CRACK BEAMS The preceding conclusions based on the data reported in Tables I and II cannot be generalized to multi-crack beams where Zmax =Zmin 57:0: This is due to the fact that in this case local maxima related to the smallest damages may not be detectable in the WT modulus map. Identification of a three-crack beam: case (a). x2 ¼ 50:8.5 1 0 76. Control Health Monit. it is assumed that 30 tests are performed for each loading condition. for rðkÞ ¼ 0:0 (solid line) and for r ¼ 0:05 in Equation (20).5 x 10-3 1 76. In fact. 30 tests for each loading condition: (a) Equation (16) contour map. a higher number of tests and a higher number of interpolation points M. while sharp local maxima appear where the damage is severe. The minimization problem posed by Equation (19) is then solved. 4. b1 ¼ L=20 and bm ¼ m  L=10 for m ¼ 1. To determine whether one or more damaged sections are hidden in the flat regions of the WT modulus map. h ¼ 5 cm. have been selected. Since discrete sampling and noise determine a certain shift of the local maxima across the scales. . Z1 ¼ 0:2. for NAO ¼ 5 equally-spaced scales within the range [20. . Struct.054 0. with L ¼ 100 cm. Figure 8(b) shows the corresponding functional Pðxi Þ for NA ¼ 5 equally-spaced scales within * the range [1. and (b) functional Pðxi Þ in Equation (18). The derived estimates obtained for the damage amplitudes * * are Z1 ¼ 0:1. Z2 ¼ 0:2} and {x3 ¼ 7L=10. Z3 ¼ 0:3}.6% at x2. Z1 ¼ 0:3. * 5.0525 0. the identification method can be modified by formulating the generalized Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. Z1 ¼ 0:1}. Specifically. * m damage amplitudes require.1. 9. Apply Equation (16) for NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced loads P¼ 2 kN applied individually on the beam. r ¼ 0:05} in Equation (20). SPANOS ET AL. The estimated damage locations are x1 ¼ 5:0. 30] and NB ¼ 10 locations along the beam length. for fM ¼ 300.5 3 2.5 76. For {M ¼ 300. {x2 ¼ L=2. x3 ¼ 69:6 cm: The * * * maximum percentage error is equal to 1.0535 76.484 P. Consider next a three-crack CC beam of square cross section. scale Π 2 1. 2006. 13:472–487 . Ltd. with no error as compared to the exact values.052 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 (a) b. r ¼ 0:05g in Equation (20).1.055 0. 3]. Empty cells indicate that the minimum number of tests required is 550.5 76. Figure 8(a) shows that all damage-related local maxima are clearly captured by Equation (16). . in general.75 76. E ¼ 210 GPa: Be the damage parameters {x1 ¼ L=20. position (b) b Figure 8. .25 a. the WT modulus map is flat everywhere. the minimization problem posed by Equation (18) is used to estimate the damage locations. 4 3.053 76. D.

for fM ¼ 300. Z3 ¼ 0:1}. 13:472–487 . and {x3 ¼ L=2. .475 36. Struct. r ¼ 0:1} in Equation (20). h¼ 5 cm.xND Z1 .455 36.45 36. . when NA ¼ 5 equally-spaced scales * * are used within the range [1..1%. of damage-like amplitude-decaying local maxima such as in Figure 7(a). To determine whether additional damaged sections are hidden in Equation (16). .005 36.. . Z2 ¼ 0:8}.445 1 0. In this manner.015 0..5 3 2. bm Þjj # ð21Þ where xND1þ1 . 10 tests are carried out for each loading condition. and (b) functional Pðxi Þ in Equation (18).46 36. The damage locations x1 and x2 are first estimated by solving the minimization problem posed by Equation (18).5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 (a) b. position (b) b Figure 9. only a limited number of tests may be performed to derive an averaged displacement function to be used in Equation (16). it is also seen that Equation (16) features a quite flat region. and estimated via the minimization problem posed by Equation (18). Z1 . E ¼ 210 GPa: Be the damage parameters {x1 ¼ L=20.. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons.48 36. Three-crack CC beam subject to a load P at NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced positions. Identification of a three-crack beam: case (b) Consider a three-crack CC beam of square cross section with L¼ 100 cm. . Ltd.47 36. The estimates obtained are x1 ¼ 5:0 cm and x2 ¼ 15:02 cm. . scale 2 1. 10 tests for each loading condition: (a) Equation (16) contour ðkÞ map.. However. while local maxima at x3 ¼ L=2 are not visible. note that the minimization problem posed by Equation (21) may be also used to identify the nature. 2]. Figure 9(a) shows sharp amplitude-decaying local maxima at x1 and x2 in Equation (16). ZND Þ ¼ NC NAO NB XXX k¼1 j¼1 m¼1 jjWsðkÞ ðaj ..DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 485 4 3. for rm ¼ 0:0 (solid line) and for r ¼ 0:1 in Equation (20).. Control Health Monit. Z1 ¼ 0:8}. xND are ND2 ¼ ND À ND1 potential damage locations. {x2 ¼ 3L=20.02 0. . bm Þj À jWsðkÞ ðaj .5 0 Π 36.5 0.* ND min % * * * * OðxND1þ1 . Finally. xND . and the limited number of tests performed. 2006. the minimization approach posed by Equation (21) is used next.465 a. * minimization problem * * * Z xND1þ1 . r ¼ 0:1g in Equation (20). . Figure 9(b) shows the functional Pðxi Þ. 5. with * a maximum percentage error equal to 0. For {M ¼ 300.. .1. Compute Equation (16) for NC ¼ 5 equally-spaced loads P ¼ 2 kN applied individually on the beam.01 0. . real ones or artefacts. Since the actual damage state is unknown. in addition to the ND1 * * visible in the contour map of Equation (16). . despite the rather high level of noise. . the number ND2 shall be set arbitrarily.

additional work is warranted to test the proposed method on recorded experimental data. Based on x1 and x2 . a simple approach has been proposed to eliminate boundary effects. are taken. however. If Zmax/Zmin57. In both cases. excellent estimates have been obtained for the damage parameters. Based on the latter ones. respectively.486 P. CONCLUDING REMARKS A wavelet-based method has been presented for damage identification in Euler–Bernoulli beams. the solution of the second provides an estimate of the damage amplitudes. the generalized functional in Equation (21) is constructed. as long as the ratio between maximum and minimum damage amplitude is Zmax =Zmin 57:0. NAO ¼ 5 equally-spaced scales are selected within the range [20–30] and NB ¼ 10 locations along the beam length. subject to static loads.0. 13:472–487 . Specifically * * ND ¼ 4 is assumed. In this context. The estimates obtained for the damage amplitudes corresponding to x1 and x2 are Z1 ¼ 0:8 and Z2 ¼ 0:8. b2 ¼ 3L=20 and bm ¼ m  L=10 for m ¼ 2. a generalized minimization problem can be implemented. possible extensions can be pursued to render the identification method applicable for cases involving dynamic loading. The estimates for the * * * * * * * additional parameters are fx3 ¼ 49:4 cm. and the identification method may be implemented via the two proposed separate optimization problems. Finally. constructed via cubic interpolation on a finite grid. fx4 ¼ 70:0 cm. the reliability and possible modifications of the proposed wavelet analysis when two or more cracks are close to each other is worth investigating. the exact number of damaged sections can be determined. The first leads to an estimate of the damaged locations. . even for crack ratios as small as Z ¼ 0:1: Obviously. In this manner. The effectiveness of the proposed method has been investigated using digitally-simulated noisy displacement responses. with various geometry and damage characteristics. Ltd. a4 g are * * * * sought. the exact * number of damaged sections is captured. Further. . It has been found that. 9. a3 g and fx4 . an extensive number of tests have been carried out on CC beams featuring up to three cracks. . local maxima related to the smallest damage amplitudes may not be visible in the WT modulus map. while the damage location x3 is estimated with a percentage error as low as 1. Z4 ¼ 0:0g: Thus. Next. These local maxima. and repeated tests for each loading condition. SPANOS ET AL. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons. As an initial step. non-negligible advantages as compared to other methods in the literature are gained. and to construct a WT modulus map where only damage-related amplitude-decaying local maxima are retained. In this case. that is. Further. however. . It has been found that both poor sampling rate and noise may introduce additional damage-like local maxima in the WT modulus map. Control Health Monit. by circumventing time-consuming single optimization problems requiring an a priori knowledge of the number of damaged sections. all damage-related local maxima are clearly visible in the WT modulus map. and multi-dimensional continua. two additional couples of parameters fx3 . 2006. The damage amplitudes are correctly evaluated. 6. D. Struct. where additional damage parameters must be included. may be smoothened out by an appropriate number of measurement points. As in the previous case. Z3 ¼ 0:1g. In this manner.2%. b1 ¼ L=20. two separate optimization problems have been formulated.

Sung D-U. Hong C-S. Cycle-octave and related transforms in seismic signal analysis. Quek ST. Application of the wavelet transform to fault detection in a spur gear. Gentile A. U. Deng X. 124:152–157. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 1995. Failla G. REFERENCES 1. Wang Q. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2002. 12:393–402.I. 5. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 1998. Application of orthogonal wavelets to early gear damage detection. Widjajakusuma J. Smart Materials and Structures 2000. Crack detection in beams by wavelet analysis. Staszewski WJ. 130:225–234. 37(5):359–375. Grossmann A. Damage detection in beam structures based on frequency measurements. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1992. Italy. Geoexploration 1984. 33:35–43.A. Composite Structures 2003. 60:403–412. 18. Yan YJ.S. 40:295–315. Wang Q.N. 19:139–155. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 1984. 36:3443–3468. Damage detection with spatial wavelets. 38:617–643. Loutridis S. Bilello C. Detection of the location and size of cracks in the multiple cracked beam by spatial wavelet based approach. 2006. 24. 13:472–487 . Wavelets: theoretical concepts and vibrations related applications. Trochidis A. Messina A. 8. 38:3161–3192. Morlet J. 2003). 43:2899–2910. Journal of Sound and Vibration 2003. Yam LH. Crack identification in beams using wavelet analysis.DAMAGE DETECTION IN EULER–BERNOULLI BEAMS 487 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The financial support of this effort from NSF. Capecchi D. Levin K. 11. Damage detection using the Lipschitz exponent estimated by the wavelet transform: applications to vibration modes of a beam. Kim C-G. 15:723–736. 20. 41:1423–1443. Pai PF. 261:715–727. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2003. Delebarre C. Okafor AC. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2004. 14. Young LG. 12. Damage identification based on ridges and maxima lines of the wavelet transform. Kim YY. Wang Q. 23. Damage assessment in composites by Lamb waves and wavelet coefficients. Lee HC.R. Goupillaud P. Spanos PD. Douka E. Composites B 2002. Su X. Haase M. submitted. 126:761–768. Di Paola M. 15. Vibration-based damage detection for composite structures using wavelet transform and neural network identification. is gratefully acknowledged. Control Health Monit. Smart Materials and Structures 2003. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 2001. On the continuous wavelet transforms applied to discrete vibrational data for detecting open cracks in damaged beams. 2. Damage detection of beams using operational deflection shapes. 19. Paget CA. Ang KK. 17. 9. 3. Zhang L.. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2005. Wang WJ. 13. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 1994. 7. 39: 1803–1816. Grondel S. Tomlinson GR. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2003. Hong JC. Zhang LX. Sensitivity analysis of crack detection in beams by wavelet technique. International Journal of Solids and Structures 1999. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons.I. Proceedings of SPIE 2001. 10. Su XY. Struct. Caddemi S. 9:906–917. Tian J. Liew KM. Dutta A. 21. Crack detection in beams by wavelet analysis of transient flexural waves. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2001. 8:289–307.U. Singularity detection and processing with wavelets. Decomposition of Hardy functions into square integrable wavelets of constant shape. 16. Hwang WL. Buda G. Jiang JS. 4537:229–232. Identification of concentrated damages in Euler–Bernoulli beams under static loads. Li Z. Morlet J. Grossmann A. Vestroni F. Mallat S. Application of wavelet theory for crack identification in structures. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2000. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 2005. Structural damage detection in beams by wavelet transform. 9:497–507.R. 4. Lee YW. 40:3557–3569. Ltd. An integral equation for damage identification of Euler–Bernoulli beams under static loads. 23:85–102. (P. Shock and Vibration Digest 2005. Monitoring of impact damages in composite laminates using wavelet transform. International Journal of Engineering Science 2003. 22. Li Z. and from M. 6. McFadden PD. Chen L-W. Chang C-C.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful