IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL.

71, 2022 3524513

Ultrasonic Guided Wave Damage Localization in

Hole-Structural Bearing Crossbeam Based on
Improved RAPID Algorithm
Feiyu Teng , Juntao Wei , Shanshan Lv , Chang Peng , Lei Zhang , Zengye Ju ,
Lei Jia , and Mingshun Jiang , Member, IEEE
1 Abstract— The hole-structural bearing crossbeam plays an of high-speed trains in service with operating speeds over 35
2 important role in high-speed trains. In the service process, 200 km/h has grown continuously. However, potential threats 36
3 however, the long-term fatigue load may lead to structural behind such a rapid expansion of high-speed train transporta- 37
4 damage such as cracks, resulting in performance degradation and
5 failure. Ultrasonic guided wave (GW) technology is one of the tion networks need to be solved. Compared to regular trains, 38

6 most effective damage localization methods in structural health high-speed trains are more prone to structural damage due to 39

7 monitoring (SHM), with a high damage sensitivity and wide their higher speed, more intensive service, and more complex 40
8 monitoring range. To address the damage localization in bearing structures. The bearing structures support all the dead loads 41
9 crossbeams, a modified reconstruction algorithm for probabilistic and payloads generated by high-speed trains, which are the 42
10 inspection of damage (RAPID) based on the corrected probability
11 distribution function is proposed. First, the valid sensor paths critical structures that determine the functional integrity and 43

12 affected by damage are obtained using damage index (DI) based service safety of trains. The damage to bearing structures in 44

13 on correlation analysis. Then, the positional relationships between high-speed trains is mainly caused by fatigue loads, which 45
14 valid paths and damage are classified based on the time of flight significantly reduce bearing capacity and function. In addition, 46
15 (TOF). Finally, the damage diagnostic image and localization are most of the bearing structures will be secondarily processed, 47
16 obtained by fusion imaging using the corresponding probability
17 distribution functions and shape factors, depending on different ranging from over holes of electrical and communication 48

18 types of the path. The effectiveness was verified by numerical cables to the rivet holes of bolt connections, which reduce 49

19 simulation and experiment. By taking the crossbeam of the the original bearing performance and may cause processing 50
20 high-speed train as the research object, through the static damage. Therefore, it is important to carry out the work of 51
21 simulation of the crossbeam stress distribution under load, the damage localization for bearing structures to ensure service 52
22 damaged hot-spots area is obtained, and the sensor network is
23 designed. And then, the SHM experimental system is constructed safety and extend the service life of high-speed trains [1], [2]. 53

24 to perform damage localization experiments. The localization In the current study, ultrasonic guided wave (GW) is one 54

25 absolute error was less than 8 mm. Experimental results show of the most effective damage detection tools in the field of 55
26 that the proposed method can effectively locate the damage structural health monitoring (SHM) [3], [4] because of its 56
27 position in the crossbeam and has better accuracy and reliability fast propagation speed, low energy attenuation, rapid detection 57
28 than the traditional RAPID algorithm.
with a small number of transducers over a large area and high 58
29 Index Terms— Crossbeam, damage localization, probability sensitivity to different damage types [5], [6]. The damage 59
30 distribution function, time of flight (TOF), ultrasonic guided imaging algorithm is favored by many scholars because it 60
31 wave (GW).
yields an easily interpretable and intuitional quantitative map 61

32 I. I NTRODUCTION concerning the structural health in GW-based SHM. Some 62

represented imaging algorithms in recent years include phased 63

33

34 I N RECENT years, the global rail transportation indus-

try has witnessed unprecedented prosperity. The number
arrays [7], [8] and spatial-wavenumber filter [9], [10] using
dense arrays; delay–and–sum (DAS) [11], [12], time-reversal
(TR) [13], [14], and reconstruction algorithm for probabilistic
64

65

66
Manuscript received 27 June 2022; revised 21 August 2022; accepted
6 September 2022. Date of publication 19 September 2022; date of current inspection of damage (RAPID) [15], [16], [17], [18], [19] 67

version 4 October 2022. This work was supported in part by the National using sparse arrays, in addition to some model-based methods 68
Key Research and Development Project (General Program) under Grant [20], [21] and data-driven methods [22], [23]. 69
2020YFE0204900, in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (General Program) under Grant 62073193 and Grant 61903224, and The complex shape of the bearing structure makes it difficult 70

in part by the Key Research and Development Plan of Shandong Province to apply many methods. The crossbeam is a representative 71
(General Program) under Grant 2021CXGC010204. The Associate Editor vehicle bearing structure. Due to the higher electrification and 72
coordinating the review process was Jianbo Yu. (Corresponding author:
Mingshun Jiang.) lightweight requirements of high-speed trains, more holes exist 73

Feiyu Teng was with the Institute of Marine Science and Technology, in the crossbeams. It makes its boundary conditions more 74
Shandong University, Qingdao 266237, China. He is now with the School of complex, the area where sensor networks can be arranged is 75
Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, China.
Juntao Wei, Shanshan Lv, Lei Zhang, Lei Jia, and Mingshun Jiang are with smaller, and the signal propagation process is more compli- 76

the School of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan cated. The dense array method mostly uses pulse-echo signals, 77
250061, China (e-mail: jiangmingshun@sdu.edu.cn). which need to obtain as complete and direct propagation 78
Chang Peng and Zengye Ju are with CRRC Qingdao Sifang Company, Ltd.,
Qingdao 266111, China. scattered signals as possible. The DAS requires a clear wave 79

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIM.2022.3207808 velocity so that they can hardly be applied. The model-based 80

1557-9662 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

81 and data-driven methods are accurate in localization, but it is

82 difficult to obtain the required large number of actual damage
83 state data for large and complex structures.
84 The RAPID algorithm can realize fast, large-area dam-
85 age localization imaging. Previously, the application of this
86 method has been studied on the bearing structure of aircraft
Fig. 1. Dimensions of the crossbeam and 3-D model drawing.
87 [24] and high-speed trains [25], [26]. Most of their stud-
88 ies, however, focused on the plate area of structures and In Section III, the damage characterizations and the proposed 139
89 without structure-specific analysis. There are stress concen- improved RAPID algorithm are presented. In Section IV, 140
90 trations in the area with holes in the bearing structure, which finite-element numerical simulation is performed to validate 141
91 are more prone to damage. But the complex geometry and the proposed method. In Section V, the SHM experimental 142
92 GW propagation process increase the difficulty of detection system is constructed, and the proposed method results are 143
93 [27]. Wang et al. [28] applied the RAPID algorithm to the compared with the traditional RAPID algorithm results to 144
94 localization and quantification of corrosion damage extensions verify the superiority of the accuracy and stability of the 145
95 at the edges of holes, but this method needs a big area proposed method. In Section VI, discuss the extensibility 146
96 to arrange the sensor network. Staiarski et al. [29], Barski of the proposed method. Finally, Section VII provides the 147
97 and Stawiarski [30], and Stawiarski and Muc [31] designed conclusion. 148
98 double-row sensor arrays and equidistant arc sensor arrays
99 to detect crack lengths at the edges of circular holes by the
II. A NALYSIS OF C ROSSBEAM 149
100 RAPID algorithm, but their study requires the premise of being
101 able to predict the location of damage occurrence and the A. Crossbeam in High-Speed Train 150

102 direction of crack growth, which is more difficult to apply. As one of the major bearing structures of high-speed trains, 151
103 In addition, the probability distribution functions of the RAPID most crossbeams are located in the underframe. They are 152
104 algorithm distribute the maximum weight to the points on the important components to carry the weight of the car and hang 153
105 sensor path. The result is that the localization accuracy highly the equipment under the car [37], [38]. The crossbeam is usu- 154
106 relies on the density of the sensor path; there will be large ally made of aluminum alloy. Its upper and lower parallel parts 155
107 localization errors when the damage is not at the sensor path. are known as flanges, while the plate structure connected in 156
108 And there will have detection blind areas where at the absence the middle is termed the web. The beam theory shows that the 157
109 of path intersection or close to the sensor [32], [33], [34]. flanges resist most of the bending moment experienced by the 158
110 Jin et al. [35] proposed a RAPID method with fused damage crossbeam and the web has a better performance at carrying 159
111 index (DI) and variable shape factors to improve the detection bending and shear loads. The complex load on the crossbeam 160
112 accuracy. Azuara et al. [36] proposed a shape function for is the main reason for its structural damage. The hanging 161
113 correcting the effect of the path intersection of the RAPID equipment will make the crossbeam bear a vertical static load. 162
114 algorithm and achieved certain optimization results. These During the train movement, the vibration, such as uneven track 163
115 studies provide ideas to optimize the applicability and accuracy generates alternating vertical dynamic load transferred to the 164
116 of the RAPID algorithm by probability distribution functions. crossbeam through the connection. Stress concentration occurs 165
117 In this article, to achieve the damage localization and in the crossbeam under the load, and fatigue damage, such 166
118 online monitoring of the hole-structural bearing crossbeam, as cracks, is easily produced. The damage will increase and 167
119 the improved RAPID algorithm based on the ultrasonic GW expand with long-term service, seriously leading to fatigue 168
120 is proposed to optimize the damage localization results by fracture [39], [40]. Next, the finite-element static simulation 169
121 correcting the probability distribution function. Based on the of the crossbeam is performed to analyze the stress distribution 170
122 damaged signal and healthy signal detected by the sensor under load. 171
123 network, the DI is calculated, and a threshold value is set to
124 select the valid sensor path greatly affected by the damage.
125 They were classified as through the damage and near the B. Stress Distribution and Damage Hot-Spots in Crossbeam 172

126 damage by the relative difference in the time of flight (TOF) ABAQUS finite element analysis software is used to estab- 173

127 of the baseline signal and scattered signal. The localization lish the aluminum alloy crossbeam model and perform static 174

128 coordinates and the damage diagnostic images are obtained simulation. The dimensions of the crossbeam and 3-D model 175

129 by fusion imaging using the corresponding probability dis- are shown in Fig. 1. The material is 6063-T5 aluminum alloy, 176

130 tribution functions and shape factors, depending on different with an elastic modulus of 69 Gpa, a density of 2700 kg/m3 , 177

131 types of the path. For validating the proposed method, the and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.33. 178

132 numerical simulations and damage experiments of a hole- According to the actual installation conditions of the cross- 179

133 structural bearing crossbeam are performed. beam, to set a completely fixed boundary condition on its 180

134 The rest of this article is organized as follows. In Section II, sides, the C3D10M cell mesh type is selected. The model 181

135 finite-element static simulation is performed to analyze the is divided into 60 855 cells and 109 518 nodes. Three 182

136 stress distribution of the crossbeam. The damaged hot-spots experiments are designed as follows. The stress distribution 183

137 area where the stress concentration is obtained guide the under different loading environments and structural states is 184

138 design and installation location of the sensor network. analyzed. 185

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

Fig. 2. Mesh cell node model and load application. (a) Load areas. Fig. 4. Stress distribution with multiload cases. (a) Simulation 1. (b) Simu-
(b) Experimental crossbeam. (c) Comparison crossbeam.
lation 2. (c) Simulation 3.

Fig. 5. Stress distribution after the crack appears.

Fig. 3. Comparison of stress distribution. (a) Experimental crossbeam.
(b) Comparison crossbeam. the crack tip, and the maximum stress is much higher than 223

when there is no crack. 224

186 1) Structures With and Without Holes Comparison: As The static simulation results show that the holes destroy the 225

187 shown in Fig. 2(a), the top flange surface is divided into five performance of the web plane in carrying bending and shear 226

188 load areas. The load application position is the center of the loads. The stress concentration occurs near the hole. These 227

189 load area. The direction of the load is the downward direction areas are the first to produce damage, which called damage 228

190 perpendicular to the top flange. A nonhole comparison cross- hot-spots area. When the damage appears, the stresses in the 229

191 beam with the same geometry as the experimental crossbeam structure will be further concentrated here, and will intensify 230

192 is set up to compare their stress distribution. the damage process. Therefore, for a large structure, the 231

193 Loading a concentrated force of 5000 N in area 3. installation of sensor networks in hot-spot areas can effectively 232

194 Fig. 3 shows the stress distribution of the experimental cross- monitor crossbeam health and reduce the number of sensors 233

195 beam and the comparison crossbeam. The red dashed line used, save costs, and improve efficiency. In the crossbeam, the 234

196 marks a part of the stress concentration area. It can be observed hot-spot areas are the parts of the web with holes. 235

197 that under the same load, the stresses in the experimental In order to reduce stress concentration, the holes in the 236

198 crossbeam are concentrated in the area with holes on the web, structure are mainly circular holes or with sufficiently large 237

199 while the stresses in the comparison beam are concentrated on radius rounded corners holes. In Figs. 3 and 4, the stresses in 238

200 the surface of the lower bottom flange and at the joints on both the circular holes are concentrated on the circumference, and 239

201 sides. In addition, the stresses generated in the experimental the stresses in the holes with rounded corners are concentrated 240

202 crossbeam are much larger than those in the comparison on the rounded corners. Therefore, the analysis and experiment 241

203 crossbeam. for circular holes are representative. 242

204 2) Multiload Environment Comparison: Because the load III. M ETHODOLOGY D EVELOPMENT 243
205 environment of the structure is random except for the direction.
206 Therefore, three load environments of different magnitudes, This study proposes an improved RAPID algorithm with 244

207 positions, and quantities were used to analyze the stress distri- the probability distribution function corrected. The algorithm 245

208 bution. Simulation 1, concentrated forces of 3000, 4000, 5000, diagram is shown in Fig. 6, and the specific process is 246

209 4000, and 3000 N are applied in load areas 1–5, respectively; introduced later in this section. 247

210 Simulation 2, concentrated forces of 2000, 5000, and 3000 N

211 are applied in load areas 1–3, respectively; Simulation 3, A. Damage Characterizations 248

212 concentrated forces of 5000 and 4000 N are applied in load The comparison of the response signals from the intact and 249

213 areas 2 and 4, respectively. damaged structure is used for damage detection and localiza- 250

214 Fig. 4 shows the stress distribution in the crossbeam with tion. In signal-based damage localization, the determination of 251

215 three multiload cases. In Fig. 4, the stress concentrations still what changes in signal indicates the presence of damage and 252

216 occur at the edges of the holes in the webs. The different loads the feature extraction associated with the wave propagation 253

217 only affect the magnitude of the stresses and at which position phenomenon is crucial for the damage diagnostic imaging 254

218 of the hole they occur. algorithm. The damage characterizations used in this article 255

219 3) Structure After the Crack Appears: A 3-mm crack was include DI and TOF. 256

220 cut on the edge of the circular hole on the model. The load 1) Damage Index: The DI is defined to describe the dif- 257

221 parameters of simulation 1 are used. Fig. 5 shows the stress ference between the response signal of an intact structure 258

222 distribution. It can be seen that the stress is concentrated at and damaged structure. X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , x N } is the response 259

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

Fig. 6. Algorithm diagram.

260 signal of the intact structure, called the baseline signal. B. Improved RAPID 294

261 Y = {y1 , y2 , . . . , y N } is the response signal of the damaged The RAPID algorithm is a kind of probabilistic statistical 295
262 structure, called the damage signal. N is the number of sensor approach in which the DI describes the damage characteriza- 296
263 paths, and DI is defined as tion, the shape factor defines an elliptical detection region for 297

each sensor path, and the probability distribution function is 298

DIk = 1 − ρk 
 
264

n (x ki − x k ) yki − yk 
used as the weight to distribute the DI to each point in the 299

= 1 −  i=1 detection region. The probability distribution of the damaged 300

265
n 2 n
 2 image is constructed by the superposition of the DI in the
i=1 (x ki − x k ) i=1 yki − y k
301

elliptic regions of different sensor paths. In a sensor network 302

266 k = 1, 2, . . . , N (1) with N sensor paths, the probability of the damage existing at 303

the point (x, y) is 304

267 where DIk is the DI obtained from the kth sensor path. ρk
268 is the correlation coefficient between the baseline signal and 
N 
N

269 damage signal of the kth path, a characterization extraction P(x, y) = pk (x, y) = D Ik · Wk [Rk (x, y)] (4) 305

k=1 k=1
270 method able to represent both signal amplitude and phase
271 difference. x ki yki are the i th sample points of baseline signal where pk (x, y) is the probability that the signal change of the 306

272 and the damage signal within the time window, respectively, kth sensor path is affected by (x, y), DIk and Wk [Rk (x, y)] 307

273 xk and yk are the mean value of their corresponding data. is its DI and probability distribution function, respectively. 308

274 The effective time window is the duration of the direct wave The rule for the weight distribution of this function is based 309

275 packet, which avoids the unwanted boundary reflections and on the physical intuition that damage on the direct path 310

276 mode superposition that occurs at the later time of the signal. can produce the most significant change in the GW and the 311

277 If the baseline signal and damage signal are identical, the value amplitude of the change decreases as the distance between 312

278 of DI = 0; however, if the signals are different, the value of the damage and the direct wave path increases. Therefore, for 313

279 DI is greater than 0, and its maximum magnitude is 1. a given path, its weights consist of elliptical contours with 314

280 2) Time of Flight: TOF is defined as the time delay from the same focus and different widths, which linearly decrease 315

281 the signal received by the receiver to the excitation signal between 0 and 1. These shape profiles of a series of elliptic 316

282 generated by the actuator. In an isotropic and same shape distribution regions are illustrated in Fig. 7. The probability 317

283 material, the value of the TOF is directly proportional to the distribution function is expressed by the following equation: 318
⎧
284 length of the signal propagation path. The Hilbert transform is ⎨ 1 − Rk (x, y) , R (x, y) < β
k
285 used to evaluate the wave packet of the signal, and the time of Wk [Rk (x, y)] = β (5) 319
the wave packet maximum is the time of arrival (TOA). The ⎩
286
0, Rk (x, y) ≥ β
287 TOF of the scattered signal can be expressed as
where β is the shape factor defined as the relative distance 320

288 Tsk = TOA(μk ) − toff (2) from the (x, y) to the sensor path, represented by the following 321

equation: 322

289 where toff is the half of the excitation signal duration. μk is Dak (x, y) + Dsk (x, y)
the scattered signal obtained by subtracting the damaged signal Rk (x, y) = −1 323
290
Dk (x, y)
291 from the baseline signal. By the same method, the TOF of the  
(x −x ak )2 +(y − yak )2 + (x −x sk )2 +(y − ysk )2
292 baseline signal is =  324
(x ak −x sk )2 +(yak − ysk )2
293 Tbk = TOA(x k ) − toff . (3) −1 (6) 325

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

Fig. 7. Weight distribution of probability distribution function Wk .

Fig. 8. Weight distribution of probability distribution function W Nk .

326 where (x ak , yak ) and (x sk , ysk ) are the actuator and receiver TABLE I
327 coordinates of the kth sensor path, Dak (x, y) and Dsk (x, y) S ENSOR C OORDINATE
328 represent the distance from (x, y) to them, respectively,
329 Dk (x, y) is their distance.
330 It should be mentioned that the probability distribution
331 function in the traditional RAPID algorithm provides the
332 maximum weight for the points on the direct path, which
333 has better results when the damage is located directly on the types of sensor paths, which have their probability distribution 368
334 path and near a path intersection; however, this distribution functions and shape factors. 369
335 is not reasonable because sometimes the damage is not on The modified function is expressed in (9). The coordinates 370
336 the path but can still affect the direct wave. It will lead the of the pixel point with the highest probability are defined as 371
337 points on the path to be given an excessive weight, which the damage localization 372
338 brings a large localization error. The TOF represents the length
339 of the signal propagation path, which can be used to correct 
I 
J
 
P(x, y) = DIi · Wi [Ri (x, y)]+ DI j ·W N j R j (x, y) 373
340 the probability distribution function and set a more accurate
i=1 j =1
341 probability distribution rule.
(9) 374
342 The valid sensor path is considered to be greatly affected by
343 the damage when the DI is greater than a selected threshold where J is the number of paths near the damage, and I is the 375

344 value, and other paths are dropped. These paths can be divided number of paths through the damage. I + J is the number of 376

345 into those through the damage and those near the damage by valid sensor paths, which is equal to or lesser than N. 377

346 comparing the TOF of the baseline signal and scattered signal.
347 When the TOF of the scattered signal is basically equal to the IV. N UMERICAL S IMULATION 378
348 TOF of the baseline signal, this sensor path is considered as
A. Simulation Setup 379
349 through the damage; when the TOF of the scattered signal
350 is much greater than the TOF of the baseline signal, this The dynamics simulation is performed in the ABAQUS 380

351 sensor path is considered as near the damage. Because of the software. Because the proposed method only needs the direct 381

352 significant difference in the values of TOF with different path wave, the model is a part of the crossbeam centered on the 382

353 lengths, the relative difference shown in (7) can provide a left circular hole with a length of 300 mm. Selecting the 383

354 better reflection of the above position relationship C3D8R cell mesh type with 0.5-mm length near the hole and 384

the C3D10M cell mesh type with 1-mm length at the others, 385
Tsk both to satisfy the distribution of at least ten cells within a
355 βk = −1 (7) 386
Tbk wavelength [41] and to provide a finer division of the complex 387

356 where Tsk and Tbk is the TOF extracted from the scattered region with circular arcs. 388

357 signal and the baseline signal, respectively. When βk becomes The analyzed damage was a crack at the edge of the circular 389

358 greater, their relative difference is greater, and the damage is hole fabricated with a model cutting approach. The length of 390

359 farther away from the path. The kth sensor path is regarded as the crack is 5 mm, the width is 0.5 mm, and the coordinates 391

360 near the damage when βk is greater than the threshold value. of the geometric midpoint are (−36 mm, 35 mm). The finite 392

361 Consequently, (5) can be corrected as (8) in these paths. Its element model and meshing are shown in Fig. 9. 393

362 elliptic distribution regions are shown in Fig. 8 Eight sensors (S1–S8) were installed around the hole to 394

⎧  construct a circular sensor array with a radius of 65 mm. 395

⎪ Rk (x, y) The sensor coordinate is shown in Table I. A presented

⎪
⎨ 1− −1 , βk ≤ Rk (x, y) < 2βk 396

βk measurement technique is called a pitch-catch [42] method. 397

363 W Nk [Rk (x, y)] = 
⎪
⎪ R (x, y) The path through the hole is not counted, and only 16 sensor 398
⎩ 1+ k −1 , Rk (x, y) < βk
βk paths are selected named Pi− j (i = 1, . . . , 7 and i = 2, . . . , 8), 399

364 (8) which means the actuator Si generates the GW wave, and the 400

receiver Sj receives the response signal. The direct path is 401

365 where βk is the shape factor of the kth path, which controls the represented by the line between two points in Fig. 10. 402

366 ellipse with the weight of 1. Finally, the damage probability is Considering the thickness of the web and the noise brought 403

367 the sum of the damage probabilities obtained from these two by the operating environment and condition of the high-speed 404

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

TABLE II
DI FOR N UMERICAL S IMULATION

Fig. 11. Five-cycle excitation signal for Lamb wave.

TABLE III
TOF AND β OF D AMAGED PATHS FOR N UMERICAL S IMULATION

wave, and when the scattered wave and reflected waves are 423

received by the receiver, the waveform changes significantly; 424

Fig. 9. Finite-element model and the local zoom-in mesh. (a) Complete
structure. (b) Damaged structure. Fig. 12(b) and (d) shows sensor paths P2−4 and P3−5 , which 425

are directed through the crack. Their direct wave is changed 426

significantly, mainly in amplitude. 427

The DI of each sensor path is shown in Table II, which is 428

calculated by (1). The DI threshold value is selected as 0.005. 429

The DIs of P2−4 , P3−4 , and P3−5 are greater than the threshold 430

value, and these sensor paths are valid paths. 431

The scattered signal of sensor path P3−4 is shown in 432

Fig. 13(a). By using the Hilbert transform, the envelope of the 433

excitation signal, baseline signal, and scattered signal can be 434

obtained, as shown in Fig. 13(b). The TOF of the valid paths 435

Fig. 10. Sensor network.

is calculated by (2) and (3). The shape factor β threshold 436

value is selected as 0.05, and the β of the valid paths are 437

405 trains [20], the central frequency of 400 kHz is selected. obtained as 0.03065, 0.11805, and 0.03499. These parameters 438

406 As shown in Fig. 11, a Hanning-windowed 5 cycles sinusoidal are shown in Table III. Among them, β of P3−4 is greater than 439

407 tone burst is used as the excitation signal, toff = 6.25 μs. The the threshold value, which means its Ts is significantly greater 440

408 sensor is modeled as a point. Applying a concentrated force at than Tb so that this sensor path belongs to the path near the 441

409 the actuator point, which is the same as the excitation signal. damage. While the β of the other valid paths is less than the 442

410 The direction is perpendicular to the web. The output signal threshold value, which means their Ts and Tb are the same and 443

411 is the displacement component perpendicular to the surface at they directly through the damage. Except for P3−4 , β of the 444

412 the receiver point. other paths are set to the threshold value. 445

Based on the obtained DI, β, and the location relationship 446

between each path and crack, the damage probability of 447

413 B. Results and Analysis each pixel point in the measured area is obtained by (9). 448

414 Fig. 12 shows examples of comparison between the baseline Fig. 14(a) shows the damage diagnostic image obtained by the 449

415 signals and damage signals of sensor paths P2−3 , P2−4 , P3−4 , traditional method, the damage location is (−38 mm, 39 mm), 450

416 and P3−5 , which represent the healthy paths away from the and Fig. 14(b) shows the damage diagnostic image of the 451

417 damage, the damage paths near the damage, and the damage proposed method, the location is (−33 mm, 33 mm). The 452

418 paths through the damage, respectively. Fig. 12(a) shows the absolute error of location coordinates of the proposed method 453

419 sensor path P2−3 , far from the crack, and the direct wave is 3.605 mm, which is less than 4.472 mm of the traditional 454

420 does not change; Fig. 12(c) shows the sensor path P3−4 , RAPID algorithm. Numerical simulation results verify the 455

421 near the crack, and the direct wave has some phase changes. feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method to achieve 456

422 It is due to the direct wave coupling, a part of the scattered structural damage localization of the crossbeam. 457

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

Fig. 12. Comparison of baseline signals and damaged signals for crack (a) Sensor path P2−3 . (b) Sensor path P2−4 . (c) Sensor path P3−4 . (d) Sensor
path P3−5 .

Fig. 13. (a) Scattered signal from sensor paths P3−4 . (b) TOF evaluation via the scattered signal.

Fig. 14. Comparisons of the damage localization results. (a) Traditional RAPID. (b) Proposed method.

458 V. E XPERIMENTAL V ERIFICATION OF SHM S YSTEM verify the accuracy of the proposed method, the SHM exper- 462

imental system was constructed, which mainly consists of 463

459 A. Experimental System Construction
three parts: piezoelectric lead zirconate titanate (PZT) Stanford 464

460 The SHM system diagram of a high-speed train hole- multiactuator-receiver transduction (SMART) layer, ultrasonic 465

461 structural bearing crossbeam is shown in Fig. 15(a). In order to GW detector, and system software, as shown in Fig. 15(b). 466

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

Fig. 15. Experimental settings. (a) System diagram. (b) Experimental system. (c) Simulated damages.

467 Eight PZT elements are embedded in the SMART Layer,

468 which can protect the PZT elements in harsh environments.
469 It has some flexibility and a uniform terminal that is easy to
470 install and cable arrangement [43], [44]. The detector is used
471 for GW excitation and acquisition. The excitation signal is a
472 Hanning-windowed 5 cycles sinusoidal tone burst, in which
473 the center frequency is 400 kHz and amplitude is ±60 V.
474 The sampling rate is 10 MHz, and the sampling length is
475 5000 samples. The system software controls the detector and
476 performs damage analysis.
477 The method of applying damage to the structure is using Fig. 16. Excitation and acquisition signals from sensor path P1−2 .
478 fixture clamps the structure to change the local stiffness of the
479 structure at the clamping area [45]. There are three damages truncated according to the cut-off time of the excitation wave. 491
480 labeled D1–D3 simulated successively on the crossbeam. The truncated time of the signal is set to 12.5 μs. 492
481 Their locations are shown in Fig. 15(c) from top to bottom. Damage D1 is selected as an example to show the data 493

processing process in this article. Fig. 17 shows a comparison 494

of a part of the acquired baseline signal and damage signal. 495

482 B. Results and Analysis
The DI of each path is shown in Table IV. The DI threshold 496

483 Fig. 16 shows a signal acquired from the sensor path P1−2 value is selected as 0.005, and the valid paths are P1−7 , P2−8 , 497

484 with an oscilloscope, divided into crosstalk and response sig- P6−8 , and P7−8 . Their Tb , Ts , and β are calculated in Table V, 498

485 nal. The crosstalk was incurred by the electronic interference and the β threshold value is selected as 0.05. The results show 499

486 from the excitation channel [11], which has essentially the that P1−8 , P2−8 , P6−8 , and P7−8 are the paths near the damage, 500

487 same shape as the excitation signal. It is difficult to avoid and P1−7 is the path through the damage. Fig. 18 shows the 501

488 in practical application because of integration requirements. scattered signals and TOF evaluation of P6−8 and P1−7 . 502

489 Following tests, the response signal of the shortest path can The proposed method and the traditional RAPID algorithm 503

490 be separated from the crosstalk so that the crosstalk can be were applied to damage D1, respectively. The imaging results 504

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

Fig. 17. Comparison of baseline signals and damaged signals for D1. (a) Sensor path P1−2 . (b) Sensor path P1−7 . (c) Sensor path P1−8 . (d) Sensor path
P2−8 . (e) Sensor path P6−8 . (f) Sensor path P7−8 .

Fig. 18. Scattered signal and TOF evaluation. (a) Sensor path P6−8 . (b) Sensor path P1−7 .

505 are shown in Fig. 19, where the localization coordinates are 21, respectively. The localization coordinates for D2 with the 509

506 (43 mm, −16 mm) for the proposed method and (54 mm, proposed method are (8 mm, −48 mm) with the traditional 510

507 6 mm) for the traditional RAPID algorithm. Similarly, the RAPID algorithm are (−2 mm, −58 mm); for D3 are (31 mm, 511

508 imaging results for D2 and D3 are shown in Figs. 20 and 32 mm), and (39 mm, 38 mm). 512

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

TABLE IV
DI FOR D AMAGE D1

Fig. 19. Damage localization results for D1. (a) Traditional RAPID. (b) Proposed method.

Fig. 20. Damage localization results for D2. (a) Traditional RAPID. (b) Proposed method.

Fig. 21. Damage localization results for D3. (a) Traditional RAPID. (b) Proposed method.

513 Error analysis and results comparison are shown in Fig. 22. Second, the absolute error of the proposed method is less 518

514 According to the results, it can be seen as follows. First, than 8 mm, the average error is 5.46 mm, and the standard 519

515 the proposed method can effectively locate the structural deviation of the error is 1.39 mm, while the average error 520

516 damage and enable to combine of SHM technology to achieve and standard deviation of the traditional RAPID algorithm are 521

517 online monitoring of the hole-structural bearing crossbeam. 11.44 and 8.83 mm. The stability and accuracy indexes of 522

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

TABLE V can effectively realize the damage localization in the bearing 545

TOF AND β OF D AMAGED PATHS FOR D1 structure or areas of the structure with monitoring needs. 546

VII. C ONCLUSION 547

This article studied the ultrasonic GW damage localization 548

method and its application in a hole-structural bearing cross- 549

beam. The study contributions are concluded as follows. 550

1) Proposed an improved RAPID algorithm based on the 551

probability distribution function. The damage localiza- 552

tion method is optimized for the RAPID algorithm 553

weight distribution issues. This algorithm obtained the 554

valid paths by correlation-based DI, using the relative 555

difference between the TOF of the baseline signal and 556

the scattered signal to classify the valid paths. The 557

damage diagnostic images and localization results are 558

obtained by fusion imaging using the corresponding 559

probability distribution functions and shape factors, 560

depending on the different types of sensor paths. 561

2) The proposed method has higher stability and accuracy. 562

Fig. 22. Summary and comparisons of the location error. Performed numerical simulation and experiment. The 563

absolute error of the proposed method is less than 8 mm, 564

the average error is 5.46 mm, and the standard deviation 565

of the error is 1.39 mm. The problem of detecting blind 566

areas due to the absence of path intersections or the 567

closeness of sensors is solved. 568

This study provides new ideas for further research of 569

RAPID and its application in SHM technology for large 570

structures. Not only in high-speed trains but also in other 571

places with hole-structural crossbeams, the proposed method is 572

feasible for application extensions. Of course, in order to make 573

the research results more effectively applied to engineering, 574

future work will focus on the development and combination 575

of temperature compensation algorithms in the presence of 576

Fig. 23. Plate structure damage localization experiment. (a) Experiment plate.
(b) Localization results. temperature variations. 577

523 the proposed method are better than the traditional RAPID R EFERENCES 578

524 algorithm. Third, the proposed method effectively optimizes [1] B. Feng, D. J. Pasadas, A. L. Ribeiro, and H. G. Ramos, “Locating 579

525 the detection of blind areas in the traditional RAPID algorithm defects in anisotropic CFRP plates using ToF-based probability matrix 580
and neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 68, no. 5, 581
526 where the damage is located at no path intersection or near the pp. 1252–1260, May 2019, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2019.2893701. 582
527 sensor (such as D1). These areas have large localization errors [2] M. Hong, Q. Wang, and Z. Su, “A guided wave approach for real- 583

528 in the traditional method and even locate at the sensor location. time health monitoring of high-speed train bogie frames,” presented at 584
the IEEE Far East Forum Nondestruct. Eval./Test., Chengdu, China, 585
Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1109/FENDT.2014.6928229. 586
529 VI. D ISCUSSION [3] S. Liao, L. Ou, and L. Xu, “Super-resolution ultrasound Lamb 587

530 In high-speed trains, structures with large areas, such as air- wave NDE imaging of anisotropic airplane laminates via deconvolu- 588
tional neural network,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 70, 2021, 589
531 tight partition walls and vehicles roof, also play an important Art. no. 4500508, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2020.3016153. 590
532 role in bearing forces. They are difficult to arrange sensor [4] K. Tschoke et al., “Feasibility of model-assisted probability of detection 591

533 networks in damaged hot-spot areas. The area to be monitored principles for structural health monitoring systems based on guided 592
waves for fiber-reinforced composites,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferro- 593
534 is generally a large, plate-like structure. In addition, plate electr., Freq. Control, vol. 68, no. 10, pp. 3156–3173, Oct. 2021, doi: 594
535 structures can be seen in other bearing structures, such as 10.1109/TUFFC.2021.3084898. 595

536 bogie arms. Therefore, a plate structure experiment is set up [5] Z. Li, J. Yi, J. Chen, and S. Hameed, “Ultrasonic Lamb waves applied 596
in nondestractive damage evaluation,” presented at the 13th Symp. 597
537 for verification. The experimental plate is shown in Fig. 23(a), Piezoelectrcity, Acoust. Waves Device Appl. (SPAWDA), Harbin, China, 598
538 and 20 test points were randomly selected, and the localization Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1109/SPAWDA.2019.8681782. 599

539 results are shown in Fig. 23(b). [6] M. V. Burkov, A. V. Eremin, A. V. Byakov, P. S. Lyubutin, 600
and S. V. Panin, “Impact damage detection in laminate and hon- 601
540 The absolute error is less than 5 mm, the average error eycomb CFRPs using Lamb wave ultrasonic sensing,” Russian 602
541 is 2.125 mm, and the standard deviation of the error is J. Nondestruct. Test., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 114–124, Jun. 2021, doi: 603

542 1.125 mm. The results show that the proposed method also 10.1134/S1061830921020042. 604
[7] Ł. Ambroziński, T. Stepinski, and T. Uhl, “Efficient tool for designing 605
543 has better localization results in the plate structure. Therefore, 2D phased arrays in Lamb waves imaging of isotropic structures,” 606
544 the proposed method has a certain degree of extensibility and J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 2283–2294, Aug. 2014. 607

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3524513 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 71, 2022

608 [8] M. Ducousso, A. Dalodière, and A. Baillard, “Evaluation of the thermal [26] J. Wang, T. Wang, and Q. Luo, “A practical structural health mon- 684
609 aging of aeronautical composite materials using Lamb waves,” Ultrason- itoring system for high-speed train car-body,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, 685
610 ics, vol. 94, pp. 174–182, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2018.09.014. pp. 168316–168326, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2954680. 686
611 [9] L. Qiu, B. Liu, S. Yuan, and Z. Su, “Impact imaging of air- [27] P. Fromme and M. B. Sayir, “Detection of cracks at rivet holes using 687
612 craft composite structure based on a model-independent spatial- guided waves,” Ultrasonics, vol. 40, nos. 1–8, pp. 199–203, May 2002, 688
613 wavenumber filter,” Ultrasonics, vol. 64, pp. 10–24, Jan. 2016, doi: doi: 10.1016/S0041-624X(02)00137-3. 689
614 10.1016/j.ultras.2015.07.006. [28] X. Wang, W. Dai, D. Xu, W. Zhang, Y. Ran, and R. Wang, “Hole-edge 690
615 [10] Y. Ren, L. Qiu, S. Yuan, and Z. Su, “A diagnostic imaging approach corrosion expansion monitoring based on Lamb wave,” Metals, vol. 10, 691
616 for online characterization of multi-impact in aircraft composite struc- no. 11, p. 1469, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.3390/met10111469. 692
617 tures based on a scanning spatial-wavenumber filter of guided wave,” [29] A. Stawiarski, M. Barski, and P. Paja˛k, “Fatigue crack detection 693
618 Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 90, pp. 44–63, Jun. 2017, doi: and identification by the elastic wave propagation method,” Mech. 694
619 10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.12.005. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 89, no. 15, pp. 119–130, May 2017, doi: 695
620 [11] A. R. Nandyala, A. K. Darpe, and S. P. Singh, “Damage localization 10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.08.023. 696
621 in cross-ply laminated composite plates under varying temperature [30] M. Barski and A. Stawiarski, “The crack detection and evaluation 697
622 conditions using Lamb waves,” Meas. Sci. Technol., vol. 31, no. 6, by elastic wave propagation in open hole structures for aerospace 698
623 Mar. 2020, Art. no. 064003, doi: 10.1088/1361-6501/ab6eca. application,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 81, pp. 141–156, Oct. 2018, 699
624 [12] N. Yue, Z. S. Khodaei, and M. H. Aliabadi, “Damage detection in doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2018.07.045. 700
625 large composite stiffened panels based on a novel SHM building [31] A. Stawiarski and A. Muc, “On transducers localization in damage 701
626 block philosophy,” Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 30, no. 4, Feb. 2021, detection by wave propagation method,” Sensors, vol. 19, no. 8, p. 1937, 702
627 Art. no. 045004, doi: 10.1088/1361-665X/abe4b4. Apr. 2019, doi: 10.3390/s19081937. 703
628 [13] Z. Hanfei et al., “Multi-sensor network for industrial metal [32] J. Zhao, X. Miao, F. Li, and H. Li, “Probabilistic diagnostic algorithm- 704
629 plate structure monitoring via time reversal ultrasonic guided based damage detection for plates with non-uniform sections using 705
630 wave,” Measurement, vol. 152, Feb. 2020, Art. no. 107345, doi: the improved weight function,” J. Vib. Eng. Technol., vol. 6, no. 3, 706
631 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107345. pp. 249–260, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s42417-018-0032-5. 707
632 [14] Q. Wang, Y. Xu, Z. Su, M. Cao, and D. Yue, “An enhanced time- [33] D. Wang, L. Ye, Z. Su, Y. Lu, F. Li, and G. Meng, “Probabilistic damage 708
633 reversal imaging algorithm-driven sparse linear array for progressive and identification based on correlation analysis using guided wave signals in 709
634 quantitative monitoring of cracks,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 68, aluminum plates,” Struct. Health Monitor., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 133–144, 710
635 no. 10, pp. 3433–3445, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2018.2879071. Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1177/1475921709352145. 711
636 [15] C. Andreades, G. P. Malfense Fierro, and M. Meo, “A nonlinear [34] H. Jin, J. Li, W. Li, and X. Qing, “Identification of multi- 712
637 ultrasonic SHM method for impact damage localisation in composite defects in an arched composite structure by the corrected proba- 713
638 panels using a sparse array of piezoelectric PZT transducers,” Ultrason- bilistic diagnostic imaging with the fused damage index,” J. Intell. 714
639 ics, vol. 108, Dec. 2020, Art. no. 106181, doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2020. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 799–810, Apr. 2022, doi: 715
640 106181. 10.1177/1045389x211032287. 716
641 [16] Y. Liu, X. Hong, and B. Zhang, “A novel velocity anisotropy prob- [35] H. Jin, J. Yan, X. Liu, W. Li, and X. Qing, “Quantitative defect 717
642 ability imaging method using ultrasonic guided waves for compos- inspection in the curved composite structure using the modified proba- 718
643 ite plates,” Measurement, vol. 166, Dec. 2020, Art. no. 108087, doi: bilistic tomography algorithm and fusion of damage index,” Ultrasonics, 719
644 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108087. vol. 113, May 2021, Art. no. 106358, doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106358. 720
645 [17] Z. Liu, X. Zhong, T. Dong, C. He, and B. Wu, “Delamination detec- [36] G. Azuara, E. Barrera, M. Ruiz, and D. Bekas, “Damage detection and 721
646 tion in composite plates by synthesizing time-reversed Lamb waves characterization in composites using a geometric modification of the 722
647 and a modified damage imaging algorithm based on RAPID,” Struct. RAPID algorithm,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 2084–2093, 723
648 Control Health Monitor., vol. 24, no. 5, p. e1919, May 2017, doi: Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2950748. 724
649 10.1002/stc.1919. [37] Y. Cheng et al., “Strain field reconstruction of crossbeam 725
650 [18] Z. Wang, S. Huang, S. Wang, Q. Wang, and W. Zhao, “Multihelical structure based on load–strain linear superposition method,” 726
651 Lamb wave imaging for pipe-like structures based on a probabilistic Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 30, no. 7, May 2021, Art. no. 075020, 727
652 reconstruction approach,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 70, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1361-665X/abff6e. 728
653 Art. no. 6002510, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2020.3038474. [38] Z. Li et al., “Strain field reconstruction of high-speed train crossbeam 729
654 [19] X. Chen, X. Li, S. Wang, Z. Yang, B. Chen, and Z. He, “Composite based on FBG sensing network and load-strain linear superposition 730
655 damage detection based on redundant second-generation wavelet trans- algorithm,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 3228–3235, Feb. 2022, 731
656 form and fractal dimension tomography algorithm of Lamb wave,” IEEE doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2021.3139648. 732
657 Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 1354–1363, May 2013, doi: [39] F. Li, H. Li, J. Qiu, and G. Meng, “Guided wave propagation in H-beam 733
658 10.1109/TIM.2012.2224277. and probability-based damage localization,” Struct. Control Health Mon- 734
659 [20] L. Qiu, S. Yuan, H. Mei, and F. Fang, “An improved Gaussian mixture itor., vol. 24, no. 5, p. e1916, May 2017, doi: 10.1002/stc.1916. 735
660 model for damage propagation monitoring of an aircraft wing spar under [40] J. Tu, Z. Tang, C. Yun, J. Wu, and X. Xu, “Guided wave-based 736
661 changing structural boundary conditions,” Sensors, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 291, damage assessment on welded steel I-beam under ambient temperature 737
662 Feb. 2016, doi: 10.3390/s16030291. variations,” Struct. Control Health Monit., vol. 28, no. 4, Jan. 2021, 738
663 [21] J. Yan, H. Jin, H. Sun, and X. Qing, “Active monitoring of fatigue Art. no. e02696, doi: /10.1002/stc.2696. 739
664 crack in the weld zone of bogie frames using ultrasonic guided [41] M. Mälzer, C. Kexel, T. Maetz, and J. Moll, “Combined inspection and 740
665 waves,” Sensors, vol. 19, no. 15, p. 3372, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.3390/ data communication network for Lamb-wave structural health monitor- 741
666 s19153372. ing,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 66, no. 10, 742
667 [22] C. Su et al., “Improved damage localization and quantification of pp. 1625–1633, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2019.2925864. 743
668 CFRP using Lamb waves and convolution neural network,” IEEE [42] A. Migot, Y. Bhuiyan, and V. Giurgiutiu, “Numerical and experimen- 744
669 Sensors J., vol. 19, no. 14, pp. 5784–5791, Jul. 15, 2019, doi: tal investigation of damage severity estimation using Lamb wave– 745
670 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2908838. based imaging methods,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 30, no. 4, 746
671 [23] B. Zhang, X. Hong, and Y. Liu, “Deep convolutional neural net- pp. 618–635, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1177/1045389X18818775. 747
672 work probability imaging for plate structural health monitoring using [43] X. Qing, S. Beard, A. Kumar, H. Chan, and R. Ikegami, “Advances in the 748
673 guided waves,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 70, Jun. 2021, development of built-in diagnostic system for filament wound composite 749
674 Art. no. 2510610, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2021.3091204. structures,” Compos. Sci. Technol., vol. 66, nos. 11–12, pp. 1694–1702, 750
675 [24] X. Zhao, H. Gao, G. Zhang, B. Ayhan, F. Yan, C. Kwan, and Sep. 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.11.007. 751
676 J. L. Rose, “Active health monitoring of an aircraft wing with embed- [44] C. Chen, Y. Chiu, Y. Huang, P. Wang, and R. Chien, “Assess- 752
677 ded piezoelectric sensor/actuator network: I. Defect detection, local- ments of structural health monitoring for fatigue cracks in metallic 753
678 ization and growth monitoring,” Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 16, no. 4, structures by using lamb waves driven by piezoelectric transducers,” 754
679 pp. 1208–1217, Jun. 2007, doi: 10.1088/0964-1726/16/4/032. J. Aerosp. Eng., vol. 34, no. 1, Jan. 2021, Art. no. 04020091, doi: 755
680 [25] M. Hong, Q. Wang, Z. Su, and L. Cheng, “In situ health monitoring 10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0001212. 756
681 for bogie systems of CRH380 train on Beijing–Shanghai high-speed [45] L. Qiu, B. Liu, S. Yuan, and Q. Bao, “A spatial filter and two linear 757
682 railway,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 378–395, PZT arrays based composite structure imaging method,” J. Vibroeng., 758
683 Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2013.11.017. vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1218–1231, May 2015. 759

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TENG et al.: ULTRASONIC GW DAMAGE LOCALIZATION IN HOLE-STRUCTURAL BEARING CROSSBEAM 3524513

760 Feiyu Teng received the B.S. degree from the Lei Zhang received the B.S. and Ph.D. degrees from 791
761 College of Automation, Chongqing University of Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, in 2009 and 2014, 792
762 Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing, China, respectively. 793
763 in 2020. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. degree He studied on exchange at the Institute of Exper- 794
764 with the School of Control Science and Engineering, imental Physics, John Kepler Linz University, Linz, 795
765 Shandong University, Jinan, China. Austria, from 2013 to 2014. He is currently an Asso- 796
766 His current research interests include nondestruc- ciate Professor with the School of Control Science 797
767 tive damage detection. and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, China. 798
His current research interests include the study of 799
novel sensors and their systems. 800

Zengye Ju received the B.S. degree from the 801

768 Juntao Wei received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao, China, 802

769 the Department of Control Science and Engineering, in 2010, and the M.S. degree from Central South 803

770 Shandong University, Jinan, China, in 2015 and University, Changsha, China, in 2013. 804

771 2018, where he is currently pursuing a Ph.D. degree He is currently a Research and Development 805

772 with the School of Control Science and Engineering. Engineer with the National Engineering Tech- 806

773 His current research interests include nondestruc- nology Research Center for High-Speed Rolling 807

774 tive damage detection and instrument techniques. Stock Assembly, CRRC Qingdao Sifang Company, 808
Ltd., Qingdao, China. His current research inter- 809
ests include structural health monitoring and safety 810
assessment of rail vehicles. 811

Lei Jia received the B.S. degree in electrical engi- 812

neering and automation from Shandong Polytechnic 813

775 Shanshan Lv received the Ph.D. degree from University, Jinan, China, in 1982, the M.S. degree 814

776 the Institute of Marine Science and Technology, in industrial automation from Shandong University, 815

777 Shandong University, Qingdao, China, in 2020. Jinan, in 1988, and the Ph.D. degree in automa- 816

778 She is currently a Post-Doctoral Researcher with tion from Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, 817

779 the School of Control Science and Engineering, in 1993. 818

780 Shandong University, Jinan, China. Her current In 1993, he joined Shandong Polytechnic Univer- 819

781 research interests include vision and ultrasonic- sity, where he has been a Professor since 1995. 820

782 guided wave-based damage detection. In 1999, he joined the School of Control Science and 821
Engineering, Shandong University, as a Professor. 822
His current research interests mainly include intelligent detection technology, 823
advanced ocean sensing technology, structural health monitoring, and seawater 824
desalination. 825

783 Chang Peng received the Ph.D. degree from the Mingshun Jiang (Member, IEEE) received the B.S. 826
784 College of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering, and Ph.D. degrees from the Department of Con- 827
785 Chongqing University, Chongqing, China, in 2014. trol Science and Engineering, Shandong University, 828
786 He is currently a Senior Engineer with the National Jinan, China, in 2004 and 2010, respectively. 829
787 Engineering Research Center for High-Speed EMU, He is currently a Professor with the School of 830
788 CRRC Qingdao Sifang Company, Ltd., Qingdao, Control Science and Engineering, Shandong Univer- 831
789 China. His current research interests include fault sity. His current research interests include intelligent 832
790 prediction and structural health monitoring. sensors, structural health monitoring, fault diagnosis, 833
digital twin and visualization, and big data analysis. 834

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Politecnica de Madrid. Downloaded on November 22,2022 at 15:58:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.