2001
DOI: 10.1007/s004190100154
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combined neural network and reduced FRF techniques for slight damage detection using measured response data

Abstract: This paper deals with structural damage detection using measured frequency response functions (FRF) as input data to arti®cial neural networks (ANN). A major obstacle, the impracticality of using full-size FRF data with ANNs, was circumvented by applying a datareduction technique based on principal component analysis (PCA). The compressed FRFs, represented by their projection onto the most signi®cant principal components, were used as the ANN input variables instead of the raw FRF data. The output is a predict… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
26
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…(9) and (10), respectively. N is the number of elements of the structure and E j is the eigenvalue of the system corresponding to jth mode.…”
Section: The Proposed Damage Indicator For Plate Structuresmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…(9) and (10), respectively. N is the number of elements of the structure and E j is the eigenvalue of the system corresponding to jth mode.…”
Section: The Proposed Damage Indicator For Plate Structuresmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It can be viewed as a statistical technique for data compression and information extraction, which has wide application in the fields of image compression, time-series analysis and pattern recognition, etc [11][12][13]. PCA application to structural dynamics has received considerable attentions in recent years [14][15][16][17]. Hasselman and Anderson [15] developed a frequency-domain tool for vibro-acoustic response predictions over a wide frequency range by principal component analysis.…”
Section: Principal Component Analysis Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, damage identification methods, based on modal strain energy (Shi et al 1998), modal curvature (Dutta and Talukdar 2004), flexibility (Catbas et al 2004) and the ratio of frequency variety squared, were put forward by researchers. On the other hand, wavelet analysis (Sun andChang 2002, Ding et al 2008b), artificial neural networks (Zang and Imregun 2004), genetic algorithms (Goldberg 1989) and statistics (Fasel et al 2005) have yet been applied to detecting structural damage by transforming modal parameters and dynamic responses. Sohn et al (2003) summarised comprehensive historic developments of damage identification methodologies and pointed out their applicabilities and potential limitations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%