See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/359325181

Automated Damage Localization for Lightweight Plates

Conference Paper · June 2021

CITATION READS

1 128

6 authors, including:

André Tavares Emilio Di Lorenzo

KU Leuven Siemens Digital Industries Software
6 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   193 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bram Cornelis Bart Peeters

Siemens Industry Software Siemens Industry Software
59 PUBLICATIONS   569 CITATIONS    282 PUBLICATIONS   8,337 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Sound quality driven active control of periodic disturbance for hybrid electric vehicles View project

ARRAYCON - application of distributed control on smart structures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bram Cornelis on 18 March 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Automated damage localization for lightweight plates
A. Tavares1, 2, E. Di Lorenzo1, B. Cornelis1, B. Peeters1, K. Gryllias2, 3, W. Desmet2, 3
1
Siemens Industry Software NV, Interleuvenlaan 68, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
2
KU Leuven, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Celestijnenlaan 300, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
3
Dynamics of Mechanical and Mechatronic Systems (DMMS), Flanders Make, Belgium
email: tavares.andre@siemens.com

ABSTRACT: The industrial application of lightweight materials is increasing across many industries such as the automotive, the
aerospace and the renewable energy sector. This growth brings new challenges for efficient and reliable damage detection. The
advancements of both Machine Learning (ML) algorithms and Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) techniques offer the correct setting
to successfully tackle these challenges. In this work, an automated modal analysis procedure is combined with ML algorithms in
order to achieve an automatic procedure for damage localization. It is based on clustering techniques associated to the Local Defect
Resonance (LDR) concept, which looks at the high frequency vibrations to get a localized resonant activation of the defects. The
measurements were carried out using a Scanning Laser Doppler Vibrometer (SLDV), which provides a quick and efficient way
of obtaining full-field vibration measurements into high-frequency bands. Results obtained for lightweight plates of different
materials will be presented.

KEY WORDS: Damage localization; Non-Destructive Testing; Automated Modal Analysis; Machine Learning; Clustering.

1 INTRODUCTION plates, an automatic damage localization procedure was

Lightweight materials are characterized by high specific
strength and stiffness, which increased their implementation in
structural applications across numerous industries. Benefits
deriving from their use relate to having lighter and resistant
structures, which allow to reduce fuel consumptions in the
automotive and aerospace industries. To cope with these
advancements, it remains of high importance to have solid
damage detection methodologies which guarantee the integrity
and safety of structures. In this context, using Non-Destructive
Testing (NDT) techniques to measure vibrational behaviour
until high frequency regimes allows to obtain localized
activation of damages, which makes them more easily
detectable, according to the Local Defect Resonance (LDR)
concept [1]. This is due to a decrease in stiffness for a certain
mass of the material, caused by the presence of a defect [2].
To discriminate this behaviour, modal analysis can be
performed to obtain mode shapes which will be dominated by
defect vibration. However, for large frequency bands, many
structural modes are excited, and a manual selection of these
modes becomes a cumbersome and slow procedure. Therefore,
an automated modal analysis method is important to process
these big amounts of data without or with limited user
interaction. Clustering methods have been used to build
automatic tools for modal analysis, making use of techniques
such as fuzzy clustering [3][4] and hierarchical clustering
[5][6]. The idea is to cluster modal parameters which belong to
the same physical mode.
Moreover, when it comes to a classification step for damage
detection, Machine Learning algorithms provide advanced
computational techniques for feature classification. These
methods can often achieve state-of-the-art results with
automatic frameworks [7][8].
In this work, starting from vibration data obtained through
Laser Doppler Vibrometry measurements on lightweight
developed. This procedure allows to obtain mode shapes
through an automatic modal analysis method, and then applies
Machine Learning algorithms for the final step of accurately
localizing the damages.
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Experimental Modal Analysis
Modal analysis involves the interpretation of stabilization
diagrams for the characterization of a structural dynamic
system in terms of modal parameters: natural frequencies,
damping ratios and mode shapes. In this procedure, the
measured Frequency Response Functions (FRFs) are curve-
fitted by a modal model:
𝑄𝑟 {𝜓}𝑟 {𝜓}𝑡𝑟 𝑄𝑟∗ {𝜓}∗𝑟{𝜓}∗𝑡
[𝐻(𝑗𝑤)] = ∑𝑁
𝑟=1( (𝑗𝑤−𝜆𝑟 )
+ (𝑗𝑤−𝜆∗𝑟 )
𝑟
) (1)
where 𝑄𝑟 : modal scaling factor; {𝜓}𝑟 : modal vector 𝑟; 𝜆𝑟
system pole, defined by natural frequency 𝛺𝑟 and damping ratio
𝜉𝑟 .
𝜆𝑟 , 𝜆∗𝑟 = −𝜉𝑟 𝛺𝑟 ± 𝑗√1 − 𝜉𝑟2 𝛺𝑟 (2)
2.1.1 Polymax
The analysis of a stabilization diagram involves the interactive
selection of poles, which are calculated by modal parameter
estimation techniques. Among these, the “Least Squares
Complex Frequency Domain” (LSCF) is a discrete frequency
domain method which provides impressive results by using a
total least squares approach to fit a rational fraction polynomial
model to a MIMO FRF matrix. Furthermore, the “Polymax”
method introduces a right matrix-fraction variant of this
method, where the model (3) is obtained from the FRF data:
 𝑝 𝑝 −1
[𝐻(𝑤)] = ∑𝑟=0 𝑧 𝑟 [𝛽𝑟 ] ∗ (∑𝑟=0 𝑧 𝑟 [𝛼𝑟 ]) (3)
where [𝛽𝑟 ] ∈ 𝐶 𝑙∗𝑚 are the numerator matrix polynomial
coefficients; [𝛼𝑟 ] ∈ 𝐶 𝑚∗𝑚 are the denominator matrix
coefficients; and p is the modal order. The so-called z-domain
model (i.e. frequency-domain model which is derived from a
discrete-time model) is mathematically represented by:
𝑧 = 𝑒 𝑗𝑤∆𝑡 (4)
where ∆t is the sampling time. The unknown model coefficients
of (3), [𝛼𝑟 ] and [𝛽𝑟 ], are found as the least-squares solution of
these equations after linearization [9]. The Polymax technique
leads to very clear stabilization diagrams which improve the
quality of interpretation of the results and the consequential
selection of poles. With Polymax, the mathematical poles are
estimated with negative damping ratio, and therefore are
directly excluded from the stabilization diagram.
Clustering
Clustering techniques are algorithms for grouping data points
into a collection of groups, based on similarity measures, which
can be defined as calculated distances between the data point’s
features. Similar data points will be placed together in a group,
which is defined as a cluster. Clustering techniques can be
separated into hard clustering methods, where each point can
belong to a single cluster, and soft clustering methods, where a
data point can belong to more than one cluster. Moreover, there
are multiple types of clustering techniques, such as:
hierarchical clustering, partition clustering, distribution model
clustering, density-based clustering, etc. In this work, a density-
based clustering method was used to build an automated modal
analysis procedure, which is explained below.
2.2.1 Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications
with Noise (DBSCAN)
The DBSCAN technique [10] is a type of density-based
clustering, where clusters are formed by the segregation of
various density regions, based on a similarity measure which is
usually defined as a distance. Contrary to many clustering
techniques, the DBSCAN does not require that a predefined
number of clusters is selected as hyperparameter of the
algorithm. Instead, a hyperparameter associated to a radius, ϵ,
should be defined along with another hyperparameter for the
minimum number of points which should fit inside that radius
ϵ. Figure 1 illustrates the main principles of the DBSCAN
technique through a simple example. The two hyperparameters
which were described above, are defined in the top centre of the
figure. A data point which contains inside its radius the
minimum number of points, is defined as a core point (point in
blue). The existence of a core point marks the beginning of a
cluster, where all other points inside its radius ϵ are
automatically added to this cluster. The added points can again
be core points themselves (if containing inside their radius ϵ
also the minimum number of points), in which case this
procedure is repeated, and the cluster propagated. If the added
points are not core points, they are defined as the so-called
border points for that current cluster (cf. indicated border point
example in Figure 1: it does not fulfil the core point criteria as
it only has 2 points inside its ϵ radius, but is inside the ϵ radius
of another core point). A point which fulfils neither the criteria
of a core point and of a border point is defined as noise and will
not be assigned to any cluster (point in red). This happens when
its features have little similarity to the ones of other data points.
The DBSCAN algorithm concludes when all points have been
analysed and were either assigned to a cluster or were classified
as noise. One advantage of this technique is that, with these
principles, the clusters do not need to fulfil a certain criterion
of circularity or ellipticity of shape. It is therefore very
adaptable to clusters of different shapes.
Figure 1: DBSCAN's principles
3 AUTOMATIC MODAL PARAMETER SELECTION
In this work, an automatic damage localization methodology
was developed by analysing mode shapes with a Machine
Learning (ML) tool. The mode shapes were obtained through
modal analysis performed in very large frequency bands up to
200 kHz. The reason behind analysing these large frequency
bands lies in the Local Defect Resonance concept, which states
that for high frequencies there are mode shapes dominated by
defect vibration (high vibration amplitudes localized in the
defected areas), making the damages more easily detectable.
The use of an automatic modal parameter selection procedure
will facilitate the modal analysis step by rapidly calculating the
modes of the structure, substituting what would otherwise be a
slow manual selection.
Methodology
In order to build this automatic procedure, the previously
presented DBSCAN clustering technique was used. As
explained, this technique requires two defined
hyperparameters: the radius 𝜖 and the minimum number of
points. The radius is a distance measure which in this case can
be adapted to a distance calculation between modal parameters.
In a stabilization diagram, each pole is associated to a natural
frequency, a damping ratio and a modal participation factor.
The automatic modal parameter selection methodology
considered the analysis of the natural frequency (𝑓) and the
damping ratio (𝜉) of each pole. This was done by expressing
the way distances are calculated in the DBSCAN technique, in
terms of these modal parameters. In this way, the distance
between two points, 𝑝1 and 𝑝2, is calculated as:
|𝑓𝑝1 −𝑓𝑝2 | |𝜉𝑝1 −𝜉𝑝2 |
𝑑𝜀 = 𝑑𝑓 + 𝑑𝜉 = (
𝑓𝑝1
) +(
𝜉𝑝1
) (5)
As can be seen by this equation, the distances of frequency
and damping are scaled with respect to the first point’s
parameters. This is important because the scale of frequency
values varies strongly from the scale of damping values. With
this definition of distance, the DBSCAN’s radius 𝜖 parameter
was defined to be 0.06, and the minimum number of points to
be 3. This radius number was selected considering the way the
stabilization diagram is built in terms of its stable criteria for by segmenting their respective frequency band in 10 intervals.
the poles. A pole is selected as stable if it has a frequency The results from the automatic modal parameter selection
discrepancy of maximum 1% and a damping discrepancy of method applied for an interval of [20, 40[ kHz of the CFRP
maximum 5%. Therefore, the maximum radius was selected to plate can be seen in the figures below. Figure 3 shows the
be 6%. Considering the minimum number of points, this value stabilization diagram, where each red node corresponds to a
was defined to be low enough to capture small varying points stable pole calculated with the Polymax tool, and the red curve
in clusters, which in any case will be further refined in a is the sum of all FRFs. The stability criteria are 1% frequency,
subsequent cluster verification step. This cluster verification 5% damping and 2% modal participation vector. The presence
step checks a similarity criterion between the clusters. This is of many modes can be distinguished in this stabilization
done by comparing a representative point for each cluster, diagram, along with close columns of poles and certain damped
which is selected as the point with average frequency and peaks, which is a characteristic that usually gets more severe as
damping. These representative points are then compared to the frequencies get higher and higher in the overall 200 kHz
check if they belong or not to an interval of 1% frequency and spectrum. Figure 4 shows the different clusters with respect to
2% MAC between modal participation vectors (𝐿). the same stabilization diagram. This figure illustrates that the
2 clustering method allows to separate the different modes and
|𝐿𝑝1 𝐿𝑝2 |
𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑐 = (1 − ) (6) discards some spurious poles in the stabilization diagram.
(𝐿𝑝1 𝐿𝑝1 )(𝐿𝑝2 𝐿𝑝2 )
Figure 5 shows the same stabilization diagram, but in terms of
If two representative points from two different clusters match damping values.
on this criterion, they are assigned to a single cluster. However,
the representative of the resulting cluster remains the one from
the original cluster with the highest number of points. The
reasoning behind this is that perhaps this mode was separated
into two different clusters, because its damping estimates
started with a certain value but then converged to a final one.
Therefore, the original cluster with the highest number of
points should contain the final converged damping ratio for that
mode.
The overall flowchart of the automatic modal parameter
selection methodology is displayed in Figure 2.
Figure 3: Stabilization diagram. Each red node corresponds to
a stable pole.

Figure 2: Automatic modal parameter selection methodology

Results
In this work, two datasets were analysed for damage
localization, one for a Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
(CFRP) plate (5.43 mm thickness) and another one for an Figure 4: Clustered stabilization diagram. Each cluster has a
Aluminium plate (5 mm thickness), both with Flat Bottom Hole different colour and the purple crosses mark each cluster's
(FBH) damages (Figure 8 and Figure 10). The CFRP plate is representative pole.
constituted by 24 laminae with [(45/0/-45/90)]3s stacking
configuration and contains a total of 12 defects of varying
diameter and thickness. This plate was excited with a
piezoelectric patch and measured until a frequency of 200 kHz,
with a grid of 17018 nodes (which can be visualized in Figure
9), by Laser Doppler Vibrometer and the obtained FRFs
contain 10190 spectral lines. The Aluminium plate contains 10
defects with equal diameter and varying thickness, and it was
measured on 15617 nodes until a frequency of 100 kHz, with
12800 spectral lines. Both datasets have been provided by
Ghent University [11].
Given the high frequency bands inherent in these
measurements, modal analysis was performed on both datasets
 like the DBSCAN, is a clustering technique and therefore
belongs to a class of unsupervised learning algorithms.
However, it belongs to a different class of clustering algorithms
than DBSCAN, it is a centroid-based technique. For this
damage detection application, a centroid-based clustering
technique is more suitable than a density-based technique.
Mode shapes don’t share a regular density of points for high
amplitudes and therefore, it is better to section the mode shape
vector in equal numbers of regions, other than letting this
number be defined by a density measure. Moreover, the benefit
of using an unsupervised learning technique is that this ML tool
Figure 5: Clustered stabilization diagram expressed in terms is not dependent on labels to be trained.
of damping. Each cluster has a different colour and the purple Other than the mode shapes, a different input was also tested
crosses mark each cluster's representative pole. for this algorithm: the 2nd derivatives of the mode shapes. Both
these inputs are complex vectors, where each point corresponds
to an amplitude for a certain measured node. The 2nd derivatives
The modal analysis results for all frequency bands are allow to enhance the presence of a defect within a mode shape.
summarized in Table 1 and Table 2. The higher the frequency Figure 6 displays the absolute plot of mode shape with high
band is, the more difficult is the pole estimation and the frequency plate bending motion and its corresponding 2 nd
consequent mode calculation. This is a common conclusion derivative with respect to the Y direction. As can be seen, in a
given the fact that the higher the frequency the higher the mode shape with high degree of bending motion, the 2 nd
tendency for highly damped modes, which are of superior derivative shows small localized regions of high amplitude
estimation difficulty for modal parameter estimation corresponding to certain defect locations.
techniques. From a comparison between the overall
calculations of modes for both plates, it can be concluded that
there are more modes for the Aluminium plate. This is a result
of both the fact that the overall frequency spectrum is smaller
(increased difficulty in estimating modes for high frequencies)
and that the Aluminium plate has less damped motion than the
CFRP.
a) b)
Figure 6: Absolute of a) mode shape b) corresponding 2nd
Table 1: Mode calculations for the CFRP plate for all derivative with respect to Y
frequency intervals
CFRP plate The methodology is displayed in Figure 7, along with a
kHz [0,
20[
[20,
40[
[40,
60[
[60,
80[
[80,
100[
[100,
120[
[120,
140[
[140,
160[
[160,
180[
[180,
200[
representation of the absolute values of a mode shape vector.
Modes 55 33 10 5 1 4 1 1 1 0 The first step, inspired by the LDR concept, is to cluster the
highest amplitudes with K-means. A first defect map will be
obtained from the output of this step, where the points whose
amplitudes were assigned to the cluster with highest amplitudes
Table 2: Mode calculations for the Al plate for all frequency will be classified as defected. This serves as reference for the
intervals Multivariate (Gaussian) Anomaly Detection step to
Aluminium plate automatically select a threshold to classify the defected points
kHz [0, [10, [20, [30, [40, [50, [60, [70, [80, [90,
10[ 20[ 30[ 40[ 50[ 60[ 70[ 80[ 90[ 100[ based on their real and imaginary values. After this step, an
Modes 22 56 69 73 80 78 66 62 33 5 improved defect map compared to the one obtained after the K-
means step is obtained.

4 DAMAGE LOCALIZATION WITH MACHINE

LEARNING TOOL
With the mode shapes being calculated automatically for
defined frequency intervals, the next step for the automatic
damage localization methodology is to analyse them with a
Machine Learning tool. The Local Defect Resonance (LDR)
concept can inspire the following damage localization analysis
to search for the higher amplitudes within mode shapes.
Methodology
The Machine Learning tool was developed by combining two
Machine Learning techniques: the K-means clustering and the Figure 7: Machine Learning tool's methodology
Multivariate (Gaussian) Anomaly Detection. The K-means,
 This procedure is repeated for all mode shapes or 2 nd the shallower defects, the loss of stiffness is not as big.
derivatives calculated within each frequency band selected for Therefore it is likely that their Local Defect Resonance was not
modal analysis. The result of this algorithm is the sum of its excited in this frequency band, making their detection not
outputs for each frequency band. possible with this technique. Moreover, comparing both the
results of the ML tool applied to the mode shapes and their 2nd
Results
derivatives, the same conclusion as before can be taken. The
Figure 9 shows the results of the ML tool on the CFRP plate, results for the 2nd derivatives look clearer, which is a
both for the mode shapes (left) and the 2nd derivatives (right). consequence of the fact that they highlight the presence of a
The results are shown both in a top view and in a perspective defect in a mode shape.
view, where regions of high detectability with lighter colour
and taller peaks can be distinguished. The CFRP plate has 12
Flat Bottom Hole (FBH) damages (Figure 8), and their
detection was achieved, along with the piezopatch’s location in
the centre, whose influence was affecting the mode shapes.
Comparing both the algorithm’s result for the analysis of the
mode shapes and the respective 2nd derivatives, the latter results
seem to be less noisy, in other words, less affected by
misclassifications. This goes in line with the purpose of Figure 10: Aluminium plate
applying the 2nd derivatives in the first place, this is, in order to
highlight the presence of defects in a mode shape and make
them more easily detectable.

a) c)
Figure 8: CFRP plate

b) d)
Figure 11: ML tool results on the CFRP plate for the mode
shapes in a) top view b) perspective view and for the 2nd
derivatives in c) top view d) perspective view

a) c)
b) d)
Figure 9: ML tool results on the CFRP plate for the mode
shapes in a) top view b) perspective view and for the 2nd
derivatives in c) top view d) perspective view
The results for the Aluminium plate (Figure 10 with 10
damages) are shown in Figure 11, also both for the mode shapes
(left) and the 2nd derivatives (right). Similarly to the previous
results shown for the CFRP plate, these detectability maps in
Figure 11 are shown for a top and perspective view. Several
regions of high detectability which match with the defects’
locations can be distinguished. However, the three deepest
defects were not identified. Since they are not as prominent as
5 CONCLUSIONS
In this work, an automatic damage localization methodology
was developed by combining a procedure for automatic modal
parameter selection with a Machine Learning tool. The physical
concept of Local Defect Resonance was used to inspire the
development of this methodology, in order to investigate high
frequencies and the consequent modes dominated by defect
vibration. Using a density-based clustering technique proved
effective in obtaining automatically physical modes from a
stabilization diagram. Moreover, by combining k-means with
the multivariate anomaly detection for the Machine Learning
tool, a quick and effective tool for damage classification was
created. This methodology was tested on two different plates,
where several damages were successfully identified. For future
work, more investigation into the clustering methods will be
done. Moreover, additional tests will be done to investigate the
impact of the frequency band on the final damage localization
results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work leading to this publication has been funded by the
ICON project “DETECT-ION”, which fits in the
MacroModelMat (M3) research program, coordinated by
Siemens (Siemens Digital Industries Software, Belgium) and
funded by SIM (Strategic Initiative Materials in Flanders) and
VLAIO (Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship). André
Tavares is supported by a VLAIO Baekeland PhD mandate [nr.
HBC.2020.2300].

REFERENCES
[1] Solodov, I., Bai, J., Bekgulyan, S., & Busse, G. (2011). A local defect
resonance to enhance acoustic wave-defect interaction in ultrasonic
nondestructive evaluation. Applied Physics Letters, 99(21), 211911.
[2] Solodov, I., Rahammer, M., & Gulnizkij, N. (2014, October). Highly-
sensitive and frequency-selective imaging of defects via local defect
resonance. In 11th European Conference on Non-Destructive Testing.
[3] Verboven, P., Parloo, E., Guillaume, P., & Van Overmeire, M. (2002).
Autonomous structural health monitoring—part I: modal parameter
estimation and tracking. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
16(4), 637-657.
[4] Scionti, M., & Lanslots, J. P. (2005). Stabilisation diagrams: Pole
identification using fuzzy clustering techniques. Advances in
Engineering Software, 36(11-12), 768-779.
[5] Magalhaes, F., Cunha, A., & Caetano, E. (2009). Online automatic
identification of the modal parameters of a long span arch bridge.
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 23(2), 316-329.
[6] El-Kafafy, M., Devriendt, C., Weijtjens, W., De Sitter, G., & Guillaume,
P. (2014). Evaluating different automated operational modal analysis
techniques for the continuous monitoring of offshore wind turbines. In
Dynamics of Civil Structures, Volume 4 (pp. 313-329). Springer, Cham.
[7] Tavares, A., Di Lorenzo, E., Peeters, B., Coppotelli, C. & Silvestre, N.
(2021). Damage detection in lightweight structures using artificial
intelligence techniques. Manuscript submitted to Experimental
Techniques.
[8] Ince, T., Kiranyaz, S., Eren, L., Askar, M., & Gabbouj, M. (2016). Real-
time motor fault detection by 1-D convolutional neural networks. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 63(11), 7067-7075.
[9] Peeters, B., Van der Auweraer, H., Guillaume, P., & Leuridan, J. (2004).
The PolyMAX frequency-domain method: a new standard for modal
parameter estimation?. Shock and Vibration, 11(3, 4), 395-409.
[10] Ester, M., Kriegel, H. P., Sander, J., & Xu, X. (1996, August). A density-
based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with
noise. In Kdd (Vol. 96, No. 34, pp. 226-231).
[11] Segers, J., Hedayatrasa, S., Poelman, G., Van Paepegem, W., &
Kersemans, M. (2020). Probing the limits of full-field linear Local Defect
Resonance identification for deep defect detection. Ultrasonics, 106130.

View publication stats