4.3 Article

Identification of multiple open and fatigue cracks in beam-like structures using wavelets on deflection signals

期刊

CONTINUUM MECHANICS AND THERMODYNAMICS
卷 28, 期 1-2, 页码 361-378

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00161-015-0435-4

关键词

Damage identification; Multiple cracks; Open and fatigue cracks; Beam-like structures; Wavelet transform; Static deflection

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of University and Research, under the Scientific Research Program of Relevant National Interest [2010MBJK5B-005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel method for damage detection of multi-cracked beam-like structures by analyzing the static deflection is presented. The damage incurred produces a change in the stiffness of the beam. This causes a localized singularity which can be identified by a wavelet analysis of the displacement response. The existence and location of the cracks can be revealed by positions of the peaks in the continuous wavelet transform (CWT). To achieve this, the static profile of beams is analyzed with Gauss2 wavelet to identify the cracks. Beams under some ideal boundary and prescribed load conditions are considered. The deflected shape of the beam with open and fatigue cracks has been simulated under static loading using lumped crack models adopted from fracture mechanics and involving various degrees of complexity. The deflection of cracked beam in closed form for several cases of loads, crack sizes, and crack locations is calculated, and an explicit expression for the damage index (DI), based on CWT, is developed; it is demonstrated that the proposed damage index does not depend on mechanical properties of a homogeneous beam, and that the DI of one crack does not depend on the size and location of other cracks in a multiple cracked beam. Hence, the obtained expression for the DI can be used to find the size of each crack independently. Numerical results show that the method can detect cracks of small depth and is also applicable under the presence of measurement noise.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据