2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.109578
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A novel methodology for modal parameter identification of arch dam based on multi-level information fusion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To verify the superiority of the MOE modal identification method, it is compared with two advanced modal identification methods: Random Decrement Technique-based Stochastic Subspace Identification (RDT-SSI) [26] and Improved INHT [27]. Table 3 lists the results and error rates of each method in determining the modal frequencies, where the theoretical values are obtained using the modal superposition method applied in the previous steady-state dynamics module.…”
Section: Modal Frequency Identification Methods Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To verify the superiority of the MOE modal identification method, it is compared with two advanced modal identification methods: Random Decrement Technique-based Stochastic Subspace Identification (RDT-SSI) [26] and Improved INHT [27]. Table 3 lists the results and error rates of each method in determining the modal frequencies, where the theoretical values are obtained using the modal superposition method applied in the previous steady-state dynamics module.…”
Section: Modal Frequency Identification Methods Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After the original signals were decomposed by CEEMDAN to obtain the IMF components, the intensity of the noise in each IMF component could be determined by calculating the multi-scale permutation entropy (MPE) value. This measured the randomness of the time variance values of the signals at different scales [23], with a magnitude approaching 1 indicating relatively high randomness and non-stationarity values. The MPE threshold was set to 0.6 [24] in this work, and the MPE values of IMF components higher than or equal to 0.6 were regarded as noisy components and needed further filtering out by the wavelet threshold denoising (WTD) method.…”
Section: Signal Denoisingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…D-S evidence theory is more widely applicable as it can integrate information from different levels without requiring prior information, and it has a solid ability to handle evidence conflicts, making it more widely used in structural damage identification [21]. Currently, data fusion methods are commonly employed in damage identification applications, including acceleration monitoring [22,23] displacement monitoring [24,25] and traditional point strain monitoring [26,27]. However, there is few research on data fusion damage identification based on long-gauge strain sensor monitoring.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%