Structural damage detection using principal component analysis and damage indices

Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 233-248

  Tibaduiza, Diego A ^a   Mujica, Luis E ^b   Rodellar, José ^b   Güemes, Alfredo ^c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD SANTO TOMÁS   (Colombia)

^b UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

active piezoelectric system; damage detection; damage indices; principal component analysis

Indexed keywords

ACTUATORS; DAMAGE DETECTION; DATA HANDLING; FERROELECTRIC CERAMICS; FIGHTER AIRCRAFT; PIEZOELECTRICITY; SEMICONDUCTING LEAD COMPOUNDS; SENSOR NETWORKS; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING; TITANIUM COMPOUNDS; TRANSDUCERS; TURBOMACHINE BLADES;

AERONAUTICAL STRUCTURES; DAMAGE INDEX; DETECTION OF CHANGES; LEAD ZIRCONATE TITANATE; PIEZOELECTRIC SYSTEM; PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS; STRUCTURAL DAMAGE DETECTION; VIBRATIONAL RESPONSE;

PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS;

EID: 84951819193     PISSN: 1045389X     EISSN: 15308138     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1045389X14566520     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Adeyemo E, Adediwura A, (2012) Assessing heterogeneity of effect size on sample size in a meta-analysis of validity studies. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 3 (1): 219-227.
2. Alcalá C, Qin SJ, (2009) Unified analysis of diagnosis methods for process monitoring. In: 7th IFAC symposium on fault detection, supervision and safety of technical processes, Barcelona, 30 June-3 July.
3. Farrar CR, Sohn H, Park G, (2004) A statistical pattern recognition paradigm for structural health monitoring. In: 9th ASCE specialty conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural reliability, Albuquerque, NM, 26-28 July.
4. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 21: 1539-1558.
5. Jolliffe IT, (2002) Principal Component Analysis. New York: Springer.
6. Kerschen G, De Boe P, Golinval JC, et al. (2005) Sensor validation using principal component analysis. Smart Materials and Structures 14: 36-42.
7. Manson G, (2002) Identifying damage sensitive, environment insensitive features for damage detection. In: 3rd international conference on identification in engineering systems, Swansea University, Swansea, 15-17 April.
8. Manson G, Worden K, Holford K, et al. (2001) Visualization and dimension reduction of acoustic emission data for damage detection. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures 12: 529-536.
9. 2-statistic PCA-based measures for damage assessment in structures. Structural Health Monitoring: An international Journal 10 (5): 539-553.
10. Mujica LE, Vehí J, Ruiz M, et al. (2008) Multivariate statistics process control for dimensionality reduction in structural assessment. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 22: 155-171.
11. Rytter A, (1993) Vibration based inspection of civil engineering structures. PhD Thesis, Department of Building Technology and Structural Engineering, Aalborg University, Aalborg.
12. Tibaduiza DA, (2013) Design and validation of a structural health monitoring for aeronautical structures. PhD Thesis, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona.
13. Tibaduiza DA, Mujica LE, Rodellar J, (2011) Comparison of several methods for damage localization using indices and contributions based on PCA. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 305: 012013.
14. Tibaduiza DA, Mujica LE, Rodellar J, (2012) Damage classification in structural health monitoring using principal component analysis and self organizing maps. Structural Control and Health Monitoring 20: 1303-1316.
15. Tibaduiza DA, Torres MA, Mujica LE, et al. (2013) A study of two unsupervised data driven statistical methodologies for detecting and classifying damages in structural health monitoring. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 41 (1-2): 467-484.
16. Yue H, Qin SJ, (2001) Reconstruction-based fault identification using a combined index. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 40: 4403-4414.