Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AND
CHUNG-BANG YUN1,*
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
Guseong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, Korea
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Sejong University, Gunja-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, Korea
ABSTRACT: This study presents an impedance-based structural health monitoring (SHM)
technique considering temperature effects. The temperature variation results in significant
impedance variations, particularly a frequency shift in the impedance, which may lead to
erroneous diagnostic results of real structures, such as civil, mechanical, and aerospace
structures. In order to minimize the effect of the temperature variation on the impedance
measurements, a previously proposed temperature compensation technique based on the
cross-correlation between the reference-impedance data and a concurrent impedance data is
revisited. In this study, cross-correlation coefficient (CC ) after an effective frequency shift
(EFS), which is defined as the frequency shift causing two impedance data to have the
maximum correlation, is utilized. To promote a practical use of the proposed SHM strategy,
an automated continuous monitoring framework using MATLAB is developed and incorporated with the current hardware system. Validation of the proposed technique is carried out
on a lab-sized steel truss bridge member under a temperature varying environment. It has been
found that the CC values have shown significant fluctuations due to the temperature variation,
even after applying the EFS method. Therefore, an outlier analysis providing the optimal
decision limits under the inevitable variations has been carried out for more systematic
damage detection. It has been found that the threshold level shall be properly selected
considering the daily temperature range and the minimum target damage level for detection.
It has been demonstrated that the proposed strategy combining the EFS and the outlier
analysis can be effectively used in the automated continuous SHM of critical structural
members under temperature variations.
Key Words: impedance of piezoelectric sensors, structural health monitoring, temperature
effects, effective frequency shift, cross-correlation coefficients, outlier analysis, steel truss
members.
INTRODUCTION
health monitoring (SHM) has become
an important issue in many fields, such as civil,
mechanical, and aerospace engineering. In recent years,
the electromechanical impedance method, which utilizes
piezoelectric materials as collocated actuator-sensors,
has emerged as a new SHM technique (Giurgiutiu and
Rogers, 1997; Giurgiutiu et al., 1999; Park et al., 2000,
2003a, 2005, 2006a; Soh et al., 2000; Tseng et al., 2000;
Zagrai and Giurgiutiu, 2001; Bhalla et al., 2002). In this
technique, a piezoelectric sensor is surface-mounted to
the host structure by means of a high strength epoxy
TRUCTURAL
JOURNAL
OF INTELLIGENT
MATERIAL SYSTEMS
AND
367
368
1
Zs !
ZA ! Zs !
I = i sin(wt+f)
V = n sin(wt)
Piezosensor
K
C
369
P
Z
T
LED
AD5933
Microcontroller
Tx
(RF)
Structure
Indoor: 30 m
Outoor: 100 m
2.4GHz data link
Base
station
Rx
(RF)
On-line wireless
SHM
Figure 2. An active sensor node for wireless impedance-based SHM system (Mascarenas et al., 2006).
370
(4) data archiving. Using the current continuous impedance monitoring system, the impedance measurement
can be carried out automatically over sufficiently long
periods.
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Test Specimen and Test Setup
An experimental study was carried out to investigate
the feasibility of the proposed method for continuous
health monitoring using a MFC sensor on a steel truss
member under a temperature varying environment. The
test specimen is a 1/8 scale model with a dimension of
150 150 530 mm3 for a vertical truss member of
Seongsu Bridge, Seoul, Korea, which caused the collapse
of the bridge in 1994. The specimen consists of two
segments with wide flange sections of different flange
thicknesses of 6 and 3 mm welded together as in Figure 5.
Impedance analyzer
(HP4294A)
LAN connection
Telnet protocol
to send GPIB commands
and to receive measurements
Temperature measurement
(TC-31K)
RS232C
Send commands and
receive measurement
Test specimen
50 mm
6 mm
MFC
Thermocoupler
530 mm
Cut
MFC
(28x14x0.02 mm3)
Thermocoupler
40 mm
Cut
3 mm
144 mm
150 mm
371
350
350
300
300
Real (Z (w))
(b) 400
Real (Z (w))
(a) 400
250
200
250
200
150
150
100
100
50
3.05
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
50
3.05
3.15
104
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
3.15
104
Figure 6. Impedance variations due to temperature variations in a range of 10.331.38C. (a) Intact cases, (b) Damage cases with a 4 mm cut.
Test#1 at 22.6C
Test#338 at 10.3C
(a) 140
CC = 0.099
130
120
110
Test#1 at 22.6C
Test#338 at 10.3C
Max. CC = 0.986
6
Real (Z (w))
Real (Z (w))
(b) 8
4
2
100
0
90
3.05
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
3.15
104
2
3.05
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
Figure 7. Impedance data for two intact measurements. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized impedance signatures after EFS
(Reference: Test #1).
372
x^ 1 !
Test#763 at 25.8C
(b) 8
Test#805 at 20.2C
160
Test#805 at 20.2C
CC = 0.139
140
130
Max. CC = 0.983
6
Real (Z (w))
150
Real (Z (w))
120
4
2
0
110
3.05
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
2
3.05
3.15
104
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
3.15
104
Figure 8. Impedance data for two damage cases with a 2 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized impedance signatures
after EFS (Reference: Test #763).
(a) 190
Test#1116 at 22.6C
180
Test#1155 at 31.3C
170
CC = 0.100
Test#1116 at 22.6C
(b) 8
Test#1155 at 31.3C
Max. CC = 0.967
Real (Z (w))
Real (Z (w))
160
150
140
130
4
2
120
0
110
100
90
3.05
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
3.15
104
2
3.05
3.1
Frequency (Hz)
3.15
104
Figure 9. Impedance data for two damage cases with a 4 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized impedance signatures
after EFS (Reference: Test #1116).
373
(a) 350
s
n
X
ReZi, 1 ReZi, 0 2
RMSD%
100
ReZi, 0 2
i1
(b) 8
CC = 0.013
200
150
100
3.05
Test#1466 at 28.4C
Test#1522 at 21.7C
Max. CC = 0.983
250
Real (Z (w))
Real (Z (w))
300
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
2
3.05
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
Figure 10. Impedance data for two damage cases with an 8 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized impedance signatures
after EFS (Reference: Test #1466).
(a) 160
Test#1 at 22.6C
Test#951 at 22.6C
150
CC = 0.055
130
120
110
100
Test#1 at 22.6C
Test#951 at 22.6C
6
Real (Z (w))
140
Real (Z (w))
(b) 8
Max. CC = 0.920
4
2
0
90
80
3.05
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
2
3.05
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
Figure 11. Impedance data for an intact case and a damage case with a 2 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized
impedance signatures after EFS (Reference: Test #1).
374
(a)
180
(b)
Test#1 at 22.6C
Test#1116 at 22.6C
CC = 0.045
Max. CC = 0.851
6
Real (Z (w))
Real (Z (w))
160
140
120
100
80
3.05
3.1
2
3.05
3.15
104
Frequency (Hz)
3.1
3.15
104
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 12. Impedance data for an intact case and a damage case with a 4 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized
impedance signatures after EFS (Reference: Test #1).
Test#1 at 22.6C
(b) 8
Test#1 at 22.6C
(a) 180
Test#1340 at 22.6C
Test#1340 at 22.6C
CC = 0.101
Max. CC = 0.680
6
Real (Z (w))
Real (Z (w))
160
140
120
100
80
3.05
3.1
3.15
Frequency (Hz)
104
2
3.05
3.1
3.15
104
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 13. Impedance data for an intact case and a damage case with an 8 mm cut. (a) Original impedance signatures, (b) Normalized
impedance signatures after EFS (Reference: Test #1).
Intact
(a)
(b)
1
1.2
1
0.9
0.85
2mm cut
0.8
4mm cut
0.75
0.65
8mm cut
200
400
600
800
Test no.
1000
35
30
25
20
15
10
1200
1400
1600
Temperature (C)
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Temperature (C)
0.95
Max. CC w/ EFS
1600
Test no.
Figure 14. Cross-correlation coefficients for all cases with respect to Test #1. (a) After the effective frequency shift, (b) Before the effective
frequency shift.
375
100
4 mm cut
2 mm cut
35
30
25
20
15
10
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Temperature (C)
50
2 mm cut
4 mm cut 8 mm cut
250
8 mm cut
RMSD w/ EFS (%)
Intact
(b)
150
200
150
100
50
35
30
25
20
15
10
200
400
Test no.
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Temperature (C)
(a)
1600
Test no.
Figure 15. Root mean square deviations for all cases from Test #1. (a) After the effective frequency shift, (b) Before the effective frequency shift.
DV
Dth
Outlier, xV
Out-Dimensional
decision boundary
Outlier Analysis
An automated damage diagnostic system without
requiring any a priori mathematical model of the
structure, may provide an efficient SHM tool for real
structures. In order to satisfy this requirement, a
so-called novelty detection outlier analysis method
has emerged as a robust unsupervised learning pattern
recognition tool for damage detection of structures
(Worden et al., 2000; Park et al., 2003b). The outlier
analysis aims to establish simply whether or not a new
pattern is significantly different from the previous
patterns, at the same time automatically ignoring any
negligible differences, such as random fluctuations due
to noise. That is, an outlier is an observation that is
significantly different from the rest of the population
and therefore the outlier is believed to be generated by
an alternate mechanism (Barnett and Lewis, 1994).
Assuming a multivariate normal distribution (MVN)
of sample patterns, the deviation of the candidate
376
0.8
0.4
0.6
Take Di = max di
i
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0
2 0
8 10
Dth
1.05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
thr1 = 0.942
thr2 = 0.884
2 mm cut
thr3 = 0.807
4 mm cut
8 mm cut
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
1600
Temperature (C)
1
99.5%
0.8 confidence
level
0.6
Max. CC w/ EFS
Test no.
Xn x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xp
xi : input measurement vector:
CONCLUSIONS
The feasibility of the impedance-based structural
health monitoring (SHM) technique to diagnose the
integrity of the structures has been investigated under
the temperature varying environment. The temperature
variation resulted in a significant variation in the
impedance measurement, particularly a frequency shift
in the impedance, which may lead to erroneous
diagnostic results regarding the integrity of real structures including civil, mechanical, and aerospace structures. In order to minimize the effects of the temperature
variations, a previously proposed temperature compensation technique based on cross-correlation between the
reference-impedance data and a concurrent impedance
data is revisited. In this study, the cross-correlation
coefficient (CC) with an effective frequency shift (EFS),
which is defined as the frequency shift causing two
impedance data to have the maximum correlation, was
utilized. To promote a practical use of the proposed
SHM strategy, an automated continuous monitoring
framework using MATLAB has been developed and
incorporated with the current hardware system. The
proposed techniques were applied to health monitoring
of a lab-sized steel truss bridge member with the
maximum temperature variation of 218C. From the
experimental study, it has been found that the EFS
method may significantly reduce the temperature variation effects on the damage detection. However, the CC
values have still shown significant fluctuations even after
applying the EFS method. Therefore, an outlier analysis
has been also employed to determine proper threshold
levels for more systematic damage detection considering
the fluctuations in the CCs. The results of the present
experimental study demonstrated that the proposed
impedance-based automated SHM technique incorporating the EFS and the outlier analysis can be effectively
used for diagnosing the structural integrity, even with
the presence of temperature variations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was jointly supported by the Smart InfraStructure Technology Center (SISTeC) at KAIST
sponsored by the Korea Science and Engineering
Foundation, and a grant (code PM43200) from
Development of utilization technique for tide and
tidal current energy funded by Ministry of Maritime
Affairs and Fisheries of Korean government. This
financial support is greatly appreciated.
REFERENCES
Barnett, V. and Lewis, T. 1994. Outliers in Statistical Data, John Wiley
and Sons, England.
Bhalla, S., Naidu, A.S.K., Ong, C.W. and Soh, C.K. 2002. Practical
Issues in the Implementation of Electro-mechanical Impedance
Technique for NDE, In: Proceedings of SPIE Conference on
Smart Structures, Devices, and Systems, December 1618,
Melbourne, Australia, 4935:484494.
Bhalla, S., Naidu, A.S.K. and Soh, C.K. 2003. Influence of
Structure-Actuator
Interactions
and
Temperature
on
Piezoelectric Mechatronic Signatures for NDE, In:
Proceedings of SPIE Conference on Smart Materials, Structures,
and Systems, 5062:263269.
Giurgiutiu, V. and Rogers, C.A. 1997. Electro-mechanical (E/M)
Impedance Method for Structural Health Monitoring and
Nondestructive Evaluation, In: Proceedings of International
Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring, September 1820,
Stanford, CA, pp. 433444.
Giurgiutiu, V., Reynolds, A. and Rogers, C.A. 1999. Experimental
Investigation of E/M Impedance Health Monitoring of Spotwelded Structure Joints, Journal of Intelligent Material Systems
and Structures, 10:802812.
Grisso, B.L. and Inman, D.J. 2005. Developing an Autonomous OnOrbit Impedance-based SHM System for Thermal Protection
Systems, In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on
Structural Health Monitoring, September 1214, Stanford, CA,
pp. 435442.
Liang, L., Sun, F.P. and Rogers, C.A. 1994. Coupled Electromechanical Analysis of Adaptive Material SystemsDetermination of the Actuator Power Consumption and
System Energy Transfer, Journal of Intelligent Material
Systems and Structures, 5:1220.
Mascarenas, D.L., Todd, M.D., Park, G. and Farrar, C.R. 2006.
A Miniaturized Electromechanical Impedance-based Node for
the Wireless Interrogation of Structural Health, In: Proceeding
377