ScienceDirect

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375

First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex Structures and Components
First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex Structures and Components
A review of structural health monitoring methods for composite
A review of structural health materials
monitoring methods for composite
Sophia Metaxaa, Konstantinos Kalkanismaterials
b,
*, Constantinos S. Psomopoulosb, Stavros D.
Kaminarisb, George Ioannidisb
Sophia Metaxaa, Konstantinos Kalkanisb,*, Constantinos S. Psomopoulosb, Stavros D.
Kaminaris
School of Engineering. Civil Engineering
a b
, George
Department, University Ioannidis
of West b 2 Thivon 250, Aigaleo, Attica, Greece
Attica, Campus
b
School of Engineering, Elect. and Electronics Engineering Department,University of West Attica, Campus 2 Thivon 250, Aigaleo, Attica, Greece
a
School of Engineering. Civil Engineering Department, University of West Attica, Campus 2 Thivon 250, Aigaleo, Attica, Greece
b
School of Engineering, Elect. and Electronics Engineering Department,University of West Attica, Campus 2 Thivon 250, Aigaleo, Attica, Greece

Abstract

Abstract
Health monitoring techniques with regard to structural assessment has the attention of researchers worldwide owing to their
potential in providing crucial information regarding structural damage and the reassurance of expected performance of critical
Health monitoring
infrastructures duringtechniques with regard
service. These to structural
must operate assessment
with optimal systemhas performance
the attentionandof researchers worldwide
against natural hazards.owing to their
Such systems
utilize state
potential in of the art sensing
providing crucial networks.
informationTheregarding
still high structural
costs linked to the and
damage application of Structural
the reassurance Health Monitoring
of expected performance (SHM) does
of critical
dictate that theyduring
infrastructures are mainly incorporated
service. These musttooperate
structures
withof optimal
high value.
systemIt can be expectedand
performance thatagainst
composite materials
natural areSuch
hazards. increasingly
systems
utilize
utilizedstate of the
in such art sensingThe
applications. networks. The still posed
main difficulty high costs linked
by their usetoisthe
thatapplication ofmechanisms
their failure Structural Health Monitoring
are much (SHM) does
more complex.
From this
dictate thatperspective,
they are mainly health monitoringto systems
incorporated structuresandof operational
high value. Itsafety
can beevaluation
expected techniques of energy
that composite generating
materials critical
are increasingly
infrastructures
utilized in such were systematically
applications. The maininvestigated withbyregard
difficulty posed to iscurrent
their use status,
that their advantages,
failure mechanismsdisadvantages,
are much moreand the future
complex.
From this perspective,
development trend of health
existingmonitoring
systems and systems and operational
techniques safetyacquisition
sensing, data evaluation and
techniques of energy
transmission, generating
overall critical
operation and
maintenance. were systematically investigated with regard to current status, advantages, disadvantages, and the future
infrastructures
development trend of existing systems and techniques sensing, data acquisition and transmission, overall operation and
maintenance.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
©
© 2019
2019TheTheAuthors.
Peer-review Authors.
under Published by Elsevier
Published
responsibility by B.V. B.V.This
of Elsevier
the First is anSymposium
International open accesson article
Risk under the CC
and Safety of BY-NC-ND license and
Complex Structures
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Components organizers
Peer-review under responsibility of the First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex Structures and Components organizers
Peer-review under responsibility of the First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex Structures and
Components organizers
Keywords: Critical infrastructures; Structural Health Monitoring; Composite materials.

Keywords: Critical infrastructures; Structural Health Monitoring; Composite materials.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 30-210-538-1575.

E-mail address: k.kalkanis@uniwa.gr
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 30-210-538-1575.
2452-3216 © 2019 The
E-mail address: Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
k.kalkanis@uniwa.gr
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review
2452-3216 © 2019statement: Peer-review
The Authors. under
Published responsibility
by Elsevier B.V.Thisofisthe First access
an open International Symposium
article under on Risk and
the CC BY-NC-ND Safety of Complex
license
Structures and Components organizers
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review statement: Peer-review under responsibility of the First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex
Structures and Components organizers

2452-3216 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the First International Symposium on Risk and Safety of Complex Structures and Components organizers
10.1016/j.prostr.2020.01.046
370 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375
2 Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

1. Introduction

From antiquity to the present day, the science of engineering was based on the concept of "prediction". It was
always asked by engineers to design and construct a technical project that would be able to meet the operating
requirements and withstand the worst possible conditions (environmental, operating etc.), at the lowest possible cost.
Thus, the engineer, among other things, had to know all the elements of the environment and the function of the
construction prior to even starting the design.
Nevertheless, the thousands of construction failures and mishaps that have occurred to date, prove that this is not
always possible. A number of elements can go wrong in one or more steps of the manufacturing process (incorrectly
predicted loads, inadequate design, manufacturing defects, etc.) resulting in inability to perform before the expiry of
the intended operating limit of the construction.
As is easily understood, this would have been particularly difficult without accurate knowledge of the structural
state of the construction, no longer on a "forecast" basis (that is, as it would have been theoretically stressed,
according to the original design data), but on a realistic basis, according to the actual data in the current period. In
this context, Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) of structures, such as radiography, ultrasound inspection, liquid
penetrants etc. began to be introduced, that is, it was recognized that the aforementioned "forecasting" process could
not in any case be 100% successful, and any attempt to approximate this percentage has led to a large increase in the
cost of construction [1].
Owing to the above, a new trend was gradually introduced, which included the implementation of a regular
structure inspection procedure in order to examine their status, and subsequently, on the basis of this examination, to
decide on a case-by-case basis. NDTs provide the reliable (high probability of detection) and accurate (in terms of
dimensions) 'periodic control' of potential structural errors created in a construction.
The engineer can accurately detect the presence or absence of cracks, corrosion, delamination (in the case of
composite materials) or general degradation of the material at points of interest, at a time when they deem
appropriate, essentially updating the original forecast, in accordance with the actual construction data. The
development of new scientific fields, such as the design of structures under the assumption of structural failures
(Damage Tolerance Design Philosophy) [10], played an important role in achieving this goal.

2. Structural Health Monitoring

In some cases, however, it is necessary to suspend construction for a reasonable period of time in order to enable
the NDTs to be carried out, while the cost of equipment required and other costs for investigation is not low. In
addition, their execution can be continuous throughout the construction period, but only periodically, and in most
cases the control cannot be performed during the application of operating loads. Aided in this effort of "forecasting"
by the development of electronics and optics, through which advanced, reliable and low-cost sensors were created,
which were able to be permanently installed in the area of interest.
In this way, the engineer from the construction phase (or later, in the case of older structures) is given the
opportunity to place a sensor network at selected sectors/segments of a construction so that the end user can
continuously, reliably and accurately obtain data on with its behavior when subjected to operating loads.
This allows the engineer to reduce the uncertainty encountered during the initial design phase of the construction
(and therefore the safety factors - and the added costs).
In addition, it is possible to diagnose (immediately after loading) any manufacturing errors (failure to comply
with material specifications, poor construction, etc.) which could subsequently develop into premature failure
factors.
And all this, without requiring construction to be withdrawn from use, as in the case of NDTs, and at relatively
low direct costs. Understandably, when a deviation from the actual behavior of the construction with respect to the
standard is found, it is usually necessary to implementation a nondestructive investigation to identify the problem in
detail, to proceed in structural repairs or restrictions on the operation of the structure.
If repairs or operating restrictions are deemed impossible or economically unprofitable, then the construction
should be permanently withdrawn.
In order to ensure the structural integrity of the structures and thus maintain the safe operation of a structure,
various techniques for monitoring the "health" and use - behavior of the construction are applied in many areas of
engineering. The integrity of a structure is directly related to the functionality and performance of the structure and
is, therefore, one of the key factors in its safe operation.
Accordingly, a possible change in the structural health of a structure may affect its structural behavior to the
extent that repairs are necessary. Structural operations in a construction impose additional costs in two ways:
• Immediately due to the cost of design and implementation of the repair.
• Indirectly, due to the requirement to temporarily suspend construction for repair, which means loss of revenue
due to shut down.
 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375 371
Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 3

It is clear that early diagnosis of a failure requires lesser-scale corrective actions and has lower direct and indirect
implementation costs. Alternatively, if, in addition to a timely diagnosis, there is a detailed prediction of failure
progression, it may be possible to suspend the repair temporarily so that the timing of application coincides with
other events which would, in any case, require the temporary suspension of the operation of a construction (eg for
scheduled maintenance or seasonal work) thus significantly reducing indirect repair costs.
Structural health or, equivalently, the extent of the possible structural deterioration of a structure can be
ascertained either directly or indirectly. Immediately, it is done by checking for the type and extent of damage
locally. Indirectly, by comparing the response of the construction to the loads on the expected construction behavior.
Understandably, the application of one method does not preclude the application of the other - on the contrary,
the above methods are usually complementary. At this point, it should be emphasized that in both cases the
sensitivity, the probability of detection and the reliability with which the diagnosis is achieved in each case play a
very important role.
The above are determined by the "physical limitations" of each method, the equipment and software used, as well
as the personnel involved in each diagnostic methodology.
What should be emphasized is that the total cost of constructing and operating a Life Cycle Cost (LCC) is
steadily decreasing to the end users advantage.

This ambitious field of engineering is called "Structural Health Monitoring" (SHM) and summarizes the
following steps:
Step 1: Selection of locations for sensor network development. This is achieved by thoroughly calculating and
simulating the expected (standard) behavior of the structure and identifying its 'sensitive areas' (eg stress areas,
points of maximum deformation, etc.).
It also specifies the type of sensors to be used, depending on the type of sizes measured, the precision required
and the operating environment [1] (a different type of sensor will be used on the exterior surface of an aircraft to
the one applied on a reinforced concrete structure).
Step 2: Take measurements from the sensors. This phase takes place during the construction operation and
requires, inter alia, detailed knowledge of the loads required (i.e. usually expected to receive)
Step 3: Compare the measurements taken by the sensors to the standard expected and, in some cases, the
maximum [2] behavior of the inspected structure.

The most difficult phase that requires the integration of all theoretical and experimental data in order to evaluate
the results for accurate failure detection.
Initial measurement is usually performed immediately after the sensors are installed, which is compared to the
corresponding magnitudes resulting from the design and calculation of the construction. The initial measurement is
also the "reference measurement" against which the subsequent measurements will first be compared in order to
decide whether further analysis of the results is required to draw conclusions on the test integrity of the construction.

3. Structural Integrity Monitoring Systems

Due to the current economic developments in all areas of our society and particularly in the creation and
subsequent implementation of complex and costly constructions, there is an attempt to maximize the cost-
effectiveness while maintaining or extending the originally planned lifetime.
Therefore, the effort to monitor the structural integrity / optimal operation of structures both in the area of
modern aeronautics and in the field of civil engineering, shipbuilding, etc. has emerged. Structural integrity
monitoring systems can be divided into two main categories [2]:
• Load spectrum monitoring systems: These systems record the load spectrum during operational use and
calculate the cumulative fatigue damage effect using pre-existing analytical / numerical models. These systems
are called Operational Load Monitoring Systems [10].
• Health monitoring systems: These systems record accurate field parameter values (reduced deformation,
temperature, etc.) and are integrated within the structures, with the possibility of determining a failure event, its
size, location and impact. These systems are further divided into:
• Integrated, consisting of sensors, built-in logic of structural integrity and feedback capabilities to external
stimuli.
• Partially integrated, incorporating only sensory capabilities and logical structural integrity.

3.1. Monitoring Systems- The Challenges

Of particular importance for the subsequent understanding of such monitoring systems is the understanding and
definition of health which is the ability to operate a construction, during its service life, while maintaining its
structural integrity.
372 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375
4 Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

A key problem in the process of predicting and detecting failures in a structure is to measure field parameters
worthy of being associated with the failure occurring and derive its characteristics. In the case of such operating
systems, the predominant field component capable of describing the above is the difference in deformation.
Of course, how a failure is associated with the field parameters depends directly on the monitoring technique
used and the desired result. According to current developments in the field of structural integrity monitoring and
safe structure operation, two main techniques are identified: the local monitoring technique and the universal
monitoring technique.
Local techniques are usually optical or based on local field measurements using X-rays, strain gauges, optical
fibers, etc., and require prior knowledge of both the nature of the failure and the monitoring area, these require time
and effort when applied to large scale projects.
On the other hand, universal techniques (oscillation monitoring techniques) can monitor changes in the dynamic
characteristics of a structure under the influence of dynamic loads and detect any failures in both small and large
structures, but with a lesser precision compared to local techniques.
It is therefore common practice to make additional use of these techniques when monitoring the structural health
of a large-scale construction [2].
Constructions in the area of civil engineering are usually large-scale, spatially and structurally distributed and
consist of several main building blocks. These features often make it difficult to implement local health monitoring
systems and serve to implement systems based on universal techniques.
The implementation of an operating monitoring system, whether universal or local, is based on the following
stages/levels which are distinguished on the basis of the desired accuracy in detecting a failure:
• Level 1: Confirmation of structural failure
• Level 2: Spatial Failure Tracking
• Level 3: Quantification of Failure
• Level 4: Calculation of the remaining operational life
Each system is evaluated according to the level it meets.
Recognizing a failure in a structure, as mentioned above, is essentially a pattern recognition problem, where a set
of features of the structure, e.g. its operating stresses in a healthy state, which can be measured by appropriate
techniques.
Both of the above techniques (local or universal) have a common philosophy of integrating them into an SHM
system. In particular, both techniques:
• Are based on integration within the construction of sensing and recording capabilities of the measured field
parameters, using appropriate sensors.
• Require the existence of reasonable structural integrity to link them to failure and to further exploit the
measured values.

4. Structural Integrity Monitoring Systems

The structures’ mechanical properties deteriorate in service due to continuous loading, fatigue, aging and
unforeseen loading. As the modern engineer recognizes the need for maintenance on structures, diagnostic
inspections have been introduced into these structures to assess the impairment of their structural integrity. This
evaluation is difficult and not fully standardized as yet [2].
The following types of sensors, which can be used to monitor structural integrity, will be briefly analyzed:
1) Fiber optic networks;
2) Acoustic emissions.

4.1. Fiber optic networks

Given the large surface area of the components, it is assumed that extremely large numbers of sensors will be
required for SHM. Fiber optic sensors have been identified as the main technology to meet this requirement with the
significant advantage of lower weight.
Numerous sensor regions can be combined along a single optical fiber, mitigating the complexity and weight
with the wiring required for a large number of autonomous sensors.
The overriding requirement for a sensible construction is to detect the measured quantity as quickly and
accurately as possible (max. Voltage, temperature, torque) while transmitting it to the data acquisition unit. At the
same time, the measurement should be independent of external factors such as electromagnetic radiation, etc.,
having a satisfactory resolution and ease of adjustment (internal or external) to the
The discretization of the optical sensors is based on the configuration of the optical sensor in relation to the
carrier optical fiber [3]. Optical sensors incorporated internally into the carrier fiber are called intrinsic sensors while
sensors incorporated externally or into the interface between optical fibers and other device by suitable methods
(such as by fusion splicing, with soldering or other mechanical wiring), called extrinsic sensors.
 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375 373
Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 5

The basic requirement of an optical sensor assembly is to measure a field parameter in an area of interest.

4.2. Acoustic Emissions

Acoustic emissions are concerned with the creation of transient elastic waves generated by the redistribution of
the stress field. When a structure is altered, displacements are created which lead to energy release in the form of
waves propagating to the surface. Measurements with appropriate sensors are also obtained at these points.
The detection and analysis of acoustic emissions offers useful information regarding the nucleation and severity
of a failure.
Control is almost always performed during the operation of the structure, therefore AEs focus on dynamic
phenomena such as propagation of a crack or detachment.
Of course, this second point implies the difficulty of taking measurements in high-noise environments, which
adds to the signal noise [3].
A negative feature of AEs is that they can only qualitatively identify failures in the monitored structure. Other
quantitative methods need to be used. Basically, acoustic emissions are generated by stresses. Trends which in turn
cause deformations either elastic or plastic. The most detectable AEs are observed when the material undergoes
plastic deformation.
These shifts create elastic waves (ultrasound). The amount of energy, bandwidth, and waveform released by an
acoustic transmission are related to the magnitude and speed that distinguishes failure. The detection and
consequently conversion of these waves into electrical signals is the principle of the operation of AEs. The analysis
of these signals gives useful information regarding the discontinuities within a monitored structure.

5. Analysis Methods

The methods of analysis commonly used to calculate the remaining construction's life are distinguished from
those employing conventional fatigue calculation methods and those involving complex fracture mechanic methods.
The similarities between the above methods mainly include the input information (local trends and charging history,
depending on the operating time of the component in question).
On the contrary, the differences between them are found in the initial conditions and in the periodicity of the
inspections required. For example, the initial condition in the fatigue method involves a "perfect" (no cracks or other
imperfections) state of the material, while, on the other hand, fracture mechanics assumes that in each case there is
an initial defect of a given size and shape [3]. In addition, a fatigue test is considered to be complete when failure of
the specimen occurs, deriving two basic information: the number of cycles to fracture and the loads that the
specimen went through in each cycle. In contrast, in an experiment in fracture engineering, in addition to these two,
the number of cyclic loading required to extend the crack by a given length, is known.
Additional information allows the researcher to calculate the maximum inspection intervals, given the crack
behavior and expansion rate, depending on the use of a component.

5.1. Conventional fatigue calculation methods

Conventional fatigue calculation methods are usually empirical and employ statistical techniques to obtain safe
(but often conservative) calculations of material fatigue thresholds using S-N curves. A "safe" calculation is one that
ensures that the probability of failure of the component over a given period of time is extremely low.
These methods are usually based on material data collected by performing axial loading experiments of the same
material, components under maximum loading and full-scale fatigue tests.
The life span calculated using an S-N curve represents the time needed for a crack to initiate and extend to fracture.
As the stress is cyclic, the stress ratios are determined as a function of the maximum and minimum stresses for a
given experiment.

5.2. Fracture mechanics methods

On the contrary, complex methods of fracture mechanics, which incorporate the philosophy of damage tolerance,
consider both the initiation and propagation of cracks. The philosophy of damage tolerance is based on the
assumption that all constructions, whether new or in operation for many years, contain infinitesimal imperfections,
which under appropriate conditions can lead to fracture.
These imperfections may take the form of material abnormalities, such as inclusions or gaps, or may occur during
the manufacturing process. Both manufacturing processes and maintenance processes are determined taking into
374 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375
6 Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

account the prevention of such imperfections, especially in areas where stress concentration is observed. However, it
is commonly accepted and taken for granted that such defects exist in any given structure [2].

6. Applications

Health monitoring and assessment techniques has captured attention of researchers owing to their potential in
providing spatial and quantitative information regarding structural damage and the reassurance of expected
performance of a structure during its operational lifespan.
This monitoring method, although not widespread, mainly aims to maintain the integrity of major projects; The
paragraph is aimed at investigating current technologies, planning for implementation, and identifying costs and
feasibility of structural monitoring in the future. With the depletion of fossil energy, offshore wind power has
become an irreplaceable energy source for most countries in the world. In recent years, offshore wind power
generation has presented the gradual development trend of larger capacity, taller towers, and longer blades. The
more flexible towers and blades have led to the structural operational safety of the offshore wind turbine (OWT)
receiving increasing worldwide attention. From this perspective, health monitoring systems and operational safety
evaluation techniques of the offshore wind turbine structure, including the monitoring system category, data
acquisition and transmission, feature information extraction and identification, safety evaluation and reliability
analysis, and the intelligent operation and maintenance, were systematically investigated and summarized. In
conclusion, it was possible to identify that deformation and displacement sensors, along with optical and electrical
technologies are the most commonly used types of sensors.
This monitoring method, although not widespread, mainly aims to maintain the integrity of major projects; it is
not currently focused in small sized works, with the exception of a few structures of historical interest. Particularly,
the offshore wind power industry will continue to develop into deep ocean areas in the next 30 years in China.
Practical and reliable health monitoring systems and safety evaluation techniques are increasingly critical for
offshore wind farms. Simultaneously, they have great significance for strengthening operation management, making
efficient decisions, and reducing failure risks, and are also the key link in ensuring safe energy compositions and
achieving energy development targets worldwide.
Pipeline inspection technologies using sensor networks have drawn significant attention, in the applications of
natural gas pipeline inspection and monitoring. To ensure the continued safe operation of the transmission pipelines,
continuous monitoring or periodic assessment of the integrity of the pipelines is necessary. In pipeline monitoring
and inspection, the ultimate objective is to identify the locations that has defects, and obtain an accurate
measurement and assessment of the defects so that operators can take appropriate actions to prevent further damage.
The development of multi-sensor tools is essential for both the location and condition assessment of pipelines [1].
Distributed fiber sensors technology is widely used now a days for pipeline monitoring. The research advancements
carried out using these sensors is briefly presented. Recent advancements on corrosion and leakage detection using
latest sensing technologies is also presented.
It is deemed obligatory to monitor energy production systems so as to obtain operational performance reassurance.
Health Monitoring of such structures has gained much interest lately as it offers enhanced safety, optimized
inspection cycles by the use of non-destructive testing techniques, minimization of downtime and avoidance of
extended damage. Such facilities must be routinely monitored to ensure good condition to ultimately provide
reliable and hazard-free power generation [4]. Various existing measurement techniques, including fibre-optics, and
the acoustics emission, can detect and identify defects posing a threat (Fig.1).

Fig. 1. Experimental implementation of FBG optical fibres towards structural health monitoring [10]
 Sophia Metaxa et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 22 (2019) 369–375 375
Sophia Metaxa/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 7

7. Conclusion

In general, the development of successful SHM methods depends on two key factors, namely, sensing technology
[6] and the associated signal analysis and interpretation algorithm. Due to the current economic developments in all
areas of our society there is an attempt to maximize the cost-effectiveness ratio, while maintaining the originally
planned-designed lifetime. The effort to monitor structural integrity / health monitoring has thus appeared in the area
of modern day engineering.
A major problem in the predictive and fault tracking process in one construction is the measurement of field
parameters capable of being associated with any occurring failure and yielding the characteristics of the failure. Of
course, the process of linking a failure to field parameters depends directly on the monitoring technique used and the
desired result.
The SHM information gathered could be used in a condition based maintenance program in order to minimize the
time needed for inspection of components, prevent unnecessary replacement of components, Prevent failures and
Allow utility companies to be confident of power availability.
In such value added, large structures, algorithms are utilized, capable of processing the harvested signals from the
sensors for SHM, and can be further extended to the prediction of failure, estimation of the remaining service life so
as to determine the actions required. In order to develop a general-purpose algorithm for the designated applications,
efforts are needed to ensure that the whole system does not become complex in defining the relationship between
subsystems, components and subassemblies [8]. A fault prediction algorithm has the primary function of this system
which allows early warnings of structural defects to prevent major component failures. Many faults can be detected
while the defective component is still operational
In this way, the engineer is given the opportunity to reduce the uncertainty encountered during the initial design
phase of construction (and thus the safety factors - and the added cost).
In addition, he is able to diagnose any construction errors (failure to meet material specifications, poor
construction, etc.) in time (immediately after loading), which could then evolve into factors of premature
construction failure. And all this, without the need to withdraw the construction from use, as in the case of Non-
Destructive Testing techniques, and with relatively low direct costs.
Thus, necessary repair actions can be planned for the most appropriate time without the need to bring an
immediate halt to the system at the point of total failure. [9].

References

[1] G. Tsamasphyros & G. Kanterakis, 2005 Damage Tolerance Design Philosophy NTUA/SAS
[2] Structural Health Monitoring—An Introduction and Definitions. Christian Boller,DOI: 10.1002/9780470061626.shm204. Copyright © 2009
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. All rights reserved.
[3] Smart Structures Theory, Inderjit Chopra, Jayant Sirohi, Cambridge University Press, 2013
[4] Dhingra R, Overly JG, Davis GA. Life-cycle environmental evaluation of aluminum and composite intensive vehicles. Center for Clean
Products and Clean Technologies, University of Tennessee; 1999.
[5] Das S. The cost of automotive polymer composites: a review and assessment of DOE’s lightweight materials composites research. Energy
Division, Oak Ridge National University; 2001.
[6] Kasai J. Life cycle assessment, evaluation method for sustainable development. JSAE Rev 1999;20:387–93.
[7] Graedel TE, Allenby BR. Industrial ecology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2003.
[8] J.M. Henshaw, Recycling and disposal of polymer–matrix composites, in: D.B. Miracle, S.L. Donaldson (Eds.), ASM Handbook, Volume 21:
Composites, ASM International®, 2001, pp. 1006–1012.
[9] S. Pimenta, S.T. Pinho, Recycling carbon fibre reinforced polymers for structural applications: Technology review and market outlook, Waste
Management 31 (2011) 378–392.
[10] K.Kalkanis1, G. J. Tsamasphyros , G. N. Kanderakis , N. Pantelelis , G. Maistros and A. El. Tsovolos, 2011 Experimental Control of Curing
& Structural Health Monitoring for Composite Patch Repairs, Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review.