Available

Available online
online at
at www.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia
Procedia Engineering
Engineering 00
00 (2017)
(2017) 000–000
000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 1906–1911

X International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2017

Computational Framework for Online Estimation of Fatigue

Damage using Vibration Measurements from a Limited Number of
Sensors
Dimitrios Giagopoulosaa*, Alexandros Arailopoulosaa, V. Dertimanisbb, Costas
Papadimitrioucc, Eleni Chatzibb, Konstantinos Grompanopoulosdd
aDept.
Dept. of of Mechanical
Mechanical Engineering,
Engineering, University
University of
of Western
Western Macedonia,
Macedonia, Kozani,
Kozani, Greece
a
Greece
ETH Zurich,
ETH
Zurich, Inst.
Inst. of
of Structural
Structural Engineering
Engineering Dept.
Dept. Of
Of Civil,
Civil, Environmental
Environmental and
and Geomatic
Geomatic Engineering,
Engineering, Zurich,
Zurich, Switzerland
bb
Switzerland
cc
Dept.
Dept. of
of Mechanical
Mechanical Engineering,
Engineering, University
University of
of Thessaly,
Thessaly, Volos,
Volos, Greece
Greece
dPublic Power Corporation S.A., Meliti Power Plant, Greece
d
Public Power Corporation S.A., Meliti Power Plant, Greece

Abstract
Abstract

This
This study
study proposes
proposes aa computational
computational framework
framework for for the
the online
online estimation
estimation of
of fatigue
fatigue damage
damage using
using operational
operational vibration
vibration
measurements
measurements from a limited number of sensors. To infer the stress response time histories required for fatigue prediction,
from a limited number of sensors. To infer the stress response time histories required for fatigue prediction, the
the
measured
measured structural
structural response
response isis driven
driven toto aa high
high fidelity
fidelity finite
finite element
element (FE)
(FE) model,
model, which
which is
is reconciled
reconciled using
using appropriate
appropriate model
model
updating techniques that minimize the discrepancy between the experimental and analytical frequency response functions (FRFs).
Fatigue
Fatigue is
is accordingly
accordingly estimated
estimated via
via the
the Palmgren-Miner
Palmgren-Miner rule,
rule, while
while the
the available
available FE
FE model
model allows
allows for
for stress
stress estimation
estimation atat
unmeasured spots. The method is successfully validated and assessed through an experimental study that pertains to a linear steel
substructure
substructure supporting
supporting the
the entire
entire body
body ofof aa pre-beater
pre-beater assembly
assembly atat aa PPC
PPC power
power plant.
plant.
©
© 2017
2017 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published byby Elsevier
Elsevier Ltd.
Ltd.
© 2017 The Authors.
Peer-review under Published by
responsibility ofElsevier
the Ltd. committee of EURODYN 2017.
organizing
Peer-review under
Peer-review under responsibility
responsibility ofof the
the organizing
organizing committee
committee of of EURODYN
EURODYN 2017. 2017.

Keywords: FE Model
Keywords: FE Model Updating,
Updating, Strain
Strain and
and Fatigue
Fatigue Predictions,
Predictions, System Identification, Output-Only
System Identification, Output-Only Measurements.
Measurements.

*
* Corresponding
Corresponding author.
author. Tel.:
Tel.: +30-246-105-6751, fax: +30-246-105-6601.
+30-246-105-6751, fax: +30-246-105-6601.
E-mail address:
E-mail address: dgiagopoulos@uowm.gr
dgiagopoulos@uowm.gr

1877-7058 ©
1877-7058 © 2017
2017 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier Ltd.
Ltd.
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of
of the
the organizing
organizing committee
committee of
of EURODYN
EURODYN 2017.
2017.

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EURODYN 2017.
10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.424
 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 1906–1911 1907
2 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

1. Introduction

The main objective of the present work is to estimate the full strain time histories at critical locations of a complex
mechanical subassembly using operational vibration measurements from a limited number of sensors. To achieve this,
appropriate numerical and experimental methods are applied to the identification, updating and optimization of critical
model parameters. During this process, issues related to the construction of the FE model, the experimental modal
analysis procedure and the development of effective computational model updating techniques are considered.
Recently, diverse output-only vibration measurements were proposed for the estimation of fatigue damage
accumulation in metallic structures [1,2]. Predictions of fatigue damage accumulation at a point of a structure can be
estimated using available damage accumulation models that analyze the actual stress time histories developed during
operation [3,4]. To proceed with fatigue predictions, one has to infer the stress response time histories characteristics
based on the monitoring information contained in vibration measurements collected from a limited number of sensors
attached to a structure. Such predictions are possible if one combines the information in the measurements with
information obtained from a high fidelity FE model of the structure. Such a model may be optimized with respect to
the data, using model updating methods [5, 6, 14-16]. These are often formulated as weighted least-squares estimation
problems, in which the objective function usually involves weighted, modal-based metrics.

2. Description of the proposed computational framework

2.1. FE model updating

Let D  {ˆr , ˆr R o , r  1, , m} be the measured modal data from a structure at No degrees of freedom (DOFs),
N

ˆ r and ˆr denote the natural frequencies and the mode shapes, respectively, for a number m of observed modes.
where 
Consider a parameterized class of linear structural models used to model the dynamic behaviour of the structure and
let   RN be the set of free structural model parameters to be identified using the measured modal data. The
objective in a modal-based structural identification methodology is to estimate the values of the parameter set  so
that the modal data {r ( ), r ( )  RN , r 
0
1, , m} predicted by the linear class of models at the corresponding
N0 measured DOFs best matches the experimentally obtained modal data in D . To this end, define

r2 ( ) ˆr2 r ( )r ( )  ˆr

 ( )  and r ( )  (1)
r
ˆr2 ˆr

for the r -th modal frequency and mode shape components, respectively, where || z ||2  zT z is the usual Euclidean
r ( )  ˆrTr ( ) / r ( ) is a normalization constant [5, 6]. A measure of fit of the form
2
norm and

m m m
J1 ( )
r 1

 ( ) and J ( )  
2
r 2 ( ) 1 MAC ( )
2
r
r 1 r 1
2
r (2)

is then assigned to each component, where MACr ( )  rr Tˆr ( ) / r ˆr is the Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC)
between the r -th experimental and numerical mode shape [7-11]. Using the MAC definition, a global correlation
coefficient may be defined for any measured frequency point k
1908 Dimitrios
Dimitrios Giagopoulos
Giagopoulos et al.
et al./ / Procedia
Procedia Engineering
Engineering 199 (2017)
00 (2017) 1906–1911
000–000 3

2
H X (k )H H A (k )
xs (k )  (3)
HX (k )H HX (k ) HA (k )H HA (k )
where HX (k ) and HA (k ) are the experimental (measured) and the analytical (predicted) response vectors at
matching excitation - response locations, respectively [12, 13]. Similar to the MAC, xs (k ) is bounded between
zero and unity, while it cannot detect scaling errors and it is only sensitive to discrepancies in the overall deflection
shape of the structure. This feature does not allow the identification of identical FRFs, especially when a measurement
and its prediction are correlated. To account for this problem a supplementary correlation coefficient is defined as

2 H X (k )
H A (k )
H

xa (k )  (4)
HX (k ) HX (k )  HA (k )H HA (k )
H

again bounded between zero and unity. From Eqs. 3-4 and similar to modal residuals, two additional measures of fit
are proposed, corresponding to the identified resonant frequencies of the system,

m m
J3 ( ) 
1 x (ˆ , )  and J ( ) 1 x (ˆ , ) 
s r
r 1 r 1
4
2
a r
2
(5)

Thus, the objective function is formulated by the four individual objectives as

J (; w)  w1J1 ( )  w2 J2 ( )  w3 J3 ( )  w4 J4 ( ) (6)

using the weighting factors wi  0 , i 1,2,3,4 , with w1  w2  w3  w4 

1, [14-16].

2.2. Estimation of Fatigue Damage Accumulation using Stress Reconstruction

According to the Palmgren-Miner rule [2,3], fatigue damage accumulation at a point in the structure is defined as


ni
D (7)
i 1 Ni

where ni denotes the number of cycles at a stress level  (i) of the stress time history  k , Ni stands for the number
of cycles required for failure at a stress level  (i) , estimated using the rainflow counting method, and  is the number
of stress levels identified in a stress time history at the corresponding structural point. As the number of cycles to fail
depends also on the mean stress, the fatigue accumulation model is herein revised to account for a non-zero mean
stress according to the Goodman relationship


 Rt 
 R (1  ) (8)
u

where  Rt stands for the modified stress cycle range,  R signifies the original stress cycle range,   denotes the
mean stress, and is calculated by the cycle counting algorithm; and u is the ultimate tensile strength of the material.
Once the stress range spectrum for a structural member is obtained and the relevant detail category is determined, S-
N curves are used for estimating fatigue strength. In this regard, Miner summation is employed, and the fatigue
 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 1906–1911 1909
4 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

damages pertinent to the stress ranges are linearly summed. The parametric representation of S-N curves reads

1
ni 2 nj j
D ( i
)m ( )m 2
(9)
i 1 ND D j 1 ND D
i D L j D

where  D denotes fatigue limit for constant amplitude stress ranges at ND  5106 cycles;  L stands for the cut-
off limit; i and  j are the ith and jth stress ranges; ni and n j are the number of cycles in each i and  j
block; 1 and  2 represent the number of different stress range blocks above or below the constant amplitude fatigue
limit  D , respectively.

3. Experimental Application

The method described in the previous section is now applied to a linear steel frame (secondary base) that supports a
lignite grinder assembly of the PPC power plant displayed in Fig.1a. The geometry of the steel frame (Fig.1b) is
discretized mainly by solid (tetrahedral) elements [17,18], leading to a detailed FE model with approximately
2,500,000 DOFs. In order to determine the actual dynamics of the frame an experimental modal analysis is performed,
by approximating free-free boundary conditions for the test and focusing on the 0-100 Hz frequency range. Figure 1c
shows the locations of the acceleration sensors used for the tests. Based on the measured FRFs, twelve vibration modes
are successfully estimated [9,11] in the aforementioned range, the natural frequencies and the damping ratios of which
are listed in Tab.1. It follows that the estimated differences between the experimental (columns 2-3) and the numerical
modes (columns 4-5) are not insignificant, necessitating thus a FE model updating process.

Fig. 1. (a) The lignite grinder assembly; (b) FE model of the secondary base; (c) Accelerometer locations; (d) FE model parametrization parts.
1910 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 1906–1911
Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al./ Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Table 1. Experimental modes and their numerical counterparts before (columns) and after the FE model updating process.
Mode Identified Numerical (before updating) Numerical (after updating)
Frequency (Hz) Damping (%) Frequency (Hz) Error (%) Frequency (Hz) Error (%)
1 7.10 0.08 8.53 16.81 7.29 2.60
2 41.71 0.02 44.01 5.23 41.36 0.86
3 42.70 0.56 47.09 9.31 42.12 1.39
4 43.82 0.02 47.63 8.00 42.55 2.98
5 45.46 0.37 49.72 8.58 44.80 1.46
6 59.71 0.09 64.03 6.75 59.57 0.23
7 64.23 0.05 70.19 8.49 63.96 0.42
8 72.36 0.22 77.96 7.18 71.45 1.28
9 73.72 0.04 81.86 9.94 72.72 1.37
10 75.02 0.31 84.51 11.24 75.22 0.26
11 77.37 0.08 90.13 14.15 78.30 1.19
12 78.09 0.12 90.59 13.79 78.69 0.75

The latter is conducted by parametrizing the FE model as shown in Fig.1(d). All associated parts are modeled with
solid elements, while the Young’s modulus and the material density are used as design variables, leading to a total
number of twenty-eight (28) design parameters with the ranges of Tab.2. The results from the FE model updating
process are also listed in Tab.1 (columns 6-7), from where it is that the maximum percentage error between the
experimental and the updated frequencies drops below 3%.

Table 2. Design variables and optimization design limits.

Density (kg/m )
3
Young’s modulus (GPa)
Move limit
Initial Low/Upper Bound Initial Low/Upper Bound
7850 6050/9660 210 160/230 1%

Having established an updated FE model of the steel frame, the Miner’s rule is applied to the estimation of the
fatigue damage accumulation. To this end and accordance to Eurocode 3 [19] for detail category 36, a static strength
u  440 MPa is assigned, while the associated parameters of the design S-N curves are selected as m  3 ,
D  26.5 MPa and  L  14.5 MPa. The maximum stresses are calculated by incorporating the measured
acceleration time histories and the results are displayed in Fig. 2(a). Four indicative points (ST1-ST4) that exhibit
maximum stresses are considered, the calculated fatigue life for which is 35.64, 65.85, 58.96 and 269.35 days,
respectively. These results are in very close agreement with the real structure. Indeed, the induced cracks of the
experimental frame (Fig.8) are located exactly at the same positions (e.g. ST2-ST3) predicted by the numerical
analysis. And appeared only after 60 days from the time that the base was put into operation. These findings indicate
that the applied method can be a powerful tool in predicting the fatigue damage accumulation.

4. Conclusions

A computational framework is proposed for estimating fatigue damage accumulation in a linear steel substructure
of the entire body of a lignite grinder assembly at a PPC power plant. This is accomplished by combining fatigue
damage accumulation laws with stress predictions based on output only vibration measurements collected from a
limited number of sensors. Methods for estimating strains by integrating high fidelity finite element model and
estimation techniques were summarized. From the results is clear that fatigue damage is estimated, a fact that reveals
that the methodology for estimating damage due to fatigue on the entire body of a structure by combining linear
damage accumulation laws, S-N fatigue curves, rainflow cycle-counting algorithms, and acceleration measurements
 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 1906–1911 1911
6 Dimitrios Giagopoulos et al. / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

at a limited number of locations is a valuable tool for designing optimal fatigue-based maintenance strategies in a
wide variety of structures.

Fig. 2. (a) Locations of the frame where maximum stresses appear; (b) Crack in the real frame.

Acknowledgements

Prof. Chatzi and Prof. Papadimitriou would like to gratefully acknowledge the joint support of the European COST
Actions TU1406 and TU1402.

References

[1] C. Papadimitriou, C. P. Fritzen, P. Kraemer, and E. Ntotsios, "Fatigue predictions in entire body of metallic structures from a limited number
of vibration sensors using Kalman filtering," Structural Control and Health Monitoring, vol. 18, pp. 554-573, 2011.
[2] V.K. Dertimanis, E.N. Chatzi, E.N., S. Eftekhar Azam, and C. Papadimitriou, "Fatigue assessment in steel railway bridges using output only
vibration measurements and partial structural information", 3rd International Conference on Railway Technology: Research, Development and
Maintenance, Cagliari, Italy, 2016.
[3] A. Palmgren, "Die Lebensdauer von Kugallagern," VDI-Zeitschrift, vol. 68, pp. 339-341, 1924.
[4] M. A. Miner, "Cumulative damage in fatigue," Applied Mechanics Transactions (ASME), vol. 12, pp. 159-164, 1945.
[5] Mottershead, J.E. and Friswell, M.I., Model updating in structural dynamics: A survey, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 167, pp. 347-375,
1997.
[6] Mottershead, J.E., M. Link, and M.I. Friswell, The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: A tutorial. Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing, 2011. 25(7): p. 2275-2296.
[7] Fritzen, C.P., D. Jennewein, and T. Kiefer, Damage detection based on model updationg methods. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
1998. 12(1): p. 163-186.
[8] Moaveni, B., et al., Damage Identification of a Composite Beam Using Finite Element Model Updating. Computer-Aided Civil and
Infrastructure Engineering, 2008. 23(5): p. 339-359.
[9] Moaveni, B., et al., Damage identification study of a seven-story full-scale building slice tested on the UCSD-NEES shake table. Structural
Safety, 2010. 32(5): p. 347-356.
[10] Weber, B., P. Paultre, and J. Proulx, Structural damage detection using nonlinear parameter identification with Tikhonov regularization.
Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2007. 14(3): p. 406-427.
[11] Yuen, K.-V., J.L. Beck, and L.S. Katafygiotis, Efficient model updating and health monitoring methodology using incomplete modal data
without mode matching. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2006. 13(1): p. 91-107.
[12] Grafe, H., Model updating of large structural dynamics models using measured response function, in Department of Mechanical Engineering.
1999, Imperial College: London.
[13] Grafe, H., Review of frequency response function updating methods. 1995, BRITE-URANUS BRE2-CT94-0946
[14] Giagopoulos, D., et al., Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification and Propagation in Nonlinear Structural Dynamics, in Topics in Model Validation
and Uncertainty Quantification, Volume 5: Proceedings of the 31st IMAC, A Conference on Structural Dynamics, 2013,
[15] Papadimitriou, C., Ntotsios, E., Giagopoulos, D. and Natsiavas, S., Variability of updated finite element models and their predictions consistent
with vibration measurements. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2012. 19(5): p. 630-654.
[16] Arailopoulos, A., Giagopoulos, D., Finite Element Model Updating Techniques of Complex Assemblies with Linear and Nonlinear
Components, Proceedings of the IMAC-XXXIV 2016, Orlando, Florida, USA, 2016.
[17] DYNAMIS 3.1.1, Solver Reference Guide, DTECH, Thessaloniki, Greece, 2016.
[18] ANSA and META-Post, BETA CAE Systems S.A., Thessaloniki, Greece, 2016.
[19] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-9: Fatigue, EN 1993-1-9 (2005), CEN