4.5 Article

Identification of Minor Structural Damage Based on Electromechanical Impedance Sensitivity and Sparse Regularization

期刊

JOURNAL OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
卷 31, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000892

关键词

Structural damage identification; Piezoelectric impedance; Finite-element model updating; Underdetermined inverse problem; Sparse regularization method

资金

  1. Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award [DE140101741]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a structural damage identification approach based on model updating with electromechanical impedance sensitivity and the sparse regularization technique to identify the location and severity of minor damage in structures. The sensitivities of the resonance frequency shifts in the impedance responses with respect to the stiffness parameters of the host structure are calculated and used to identify the damage with a small number of resonance frequency shifts. Numerical verifications on a single lead zirconate titanate (PZT) transducer patch and a PZT on a narrow aluminum plate structure are conducted to validate the finite-element modeling technique to calculate the impedance. The effectiveness and performance of the proposed structural damage identification approach are demonstrated with numerical simulations on an aluminum plate model attached to a PZT transducer patch. The initial finite-element model and a limited number of resonance frequency shifts in the impedance responses are used for the identification. Sparse regularization, namely, the l1 regularization technique, is used for solving the inverse problem. Single and multiple damage scenarios are considered. The effects of noise in the measured impedance signals and the number of available frequency shifts on the performance of the proposed damage identification approach are investigated. The results demonstrate the performance and robustness of the proposed approach.

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

4.5
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