2019
DOI: 10.1155/2019/6581516
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Introduction of a Robust OMA Method: CoS‐SSI and Its Performance Evaluation through the Simulation and a Case Study

Abstract: Operational modal analysis (OMA) is a powerful vibration analysis tool and widely used for structural health monitoring (SHM) of various system systems such as vehicles and civil structures. Most of the current OMA methods such as pick-picking, frequency domain decomposition, natural excitation technique, stochastic subspace identification (SSI), and so on are under the assumption of white noise excitation and system linearity. However, this assumption can be desecrated by inherent system nonlinearities and va… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This is likely an effect of the higher selfnoise of the Zland geophones compared to the broadband TC 20 s seismometer, which may be greater than the excitation level of the higher modes (e.g., Brincker and Larsen, 2007). We were also not able to find a set of SSI-COV parameters that could reliably reproduce the resonant frequencies, which is again attributed to the lower signal-to-noise ratio of the geophone data (e.g., Brincker, 2014;Liu et al, 2019).…”
Section: Differences Between Surveys At Squint Archmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…This is likely an effect of the higher selfnoise of the Zland geophones compared to the broadband TC 20 s seismometer, which may be greater than the excitation level of the higher modes (e.g., Brincker and Larsen, 2007). We were also not able to find a set of SSI-COV parameters that could reliably reproduce the resonant frequencies, which is again attributed to the lower signal-to-noise ratio of the geophone data (e.g., Brincker, 2014;Liu et al, 2019).…”
Section: Differences Between Surveys At Squint Archmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The excitation force is simulated as stationary white noise, which is approximately generated as a zeromean band-pass noise [21], whose frequency range is from 0 to 50 Hz, and the standard deviation, i.e., power spectrum density, is 0.04 N 2 •s/rad. The sampling interval is chosen as ∆t = 0.01 s, and the sampling period, as shown in Figure 2, is T = N t •∆t = 1310.72 s, where N t was chosen as 2 17 . The cut-off frequency, ω c is 314.15 rad/s, and the resolution in frequency domain ∆ω is 4.79 × 10 −3 rad/s.…”
Section: Six Dof Chain Model Of a Cantilever Beammentioning
confidence: 99%
“…0.570 0.000574 0.0003616 2 13 2.217 0.000760 0.0005376 2 14 9.074 0.001219 0.0009967 2 15 37.197 0.003244 0.0029074 2 16 Out of memory 0.003264 0.0030135 2 17 Out of memory 0.006189 0.0059404…”
Section: Sampling Pointsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, the vehicle–bridge vibration structure is a variable mass time-varying structure. 3 In addition, in real life, data are obtained one after another. Therefore, the data processing method should be online and in real time and can adapt to time-varying or non-stationary characteristics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%