Mahalanobis distance among the phase portraits as damage feature

Abstract

A number of damage-sensitive features have been proposed based on the damage-induced changes in the phase portrait, reconstructed from the measured dynamic responses of structure. Of a number of alternatives, the change in phase space topology is the most widely acclaimed for assessment of structural health. In this study, a damage feature is proposed by contrasting the damaged phase portrait with the pristine one. The contrast is expressed using the Mahalanobis distance measure, which is remarkably simpler than the change in phase space topology in algorithmic aspect. The feature is referred as Mahalanobis distance among the phase portraits. The performance of the feature is demonstrated by its sensitivity and localization of damage. The noise immunity study reveals reasonable tolerance to the measurement noise. The feature is numerically illustrated on a shear building subjected to Lorentz chaotic excitations and natural wind excitations. The feature is experimentally verified in a railway bridge model subjected to moving wheel load of a model train. The results show the effectiveness of the feature for localizing both the support damage (as in bearing) and damage in the span. Simple analytical argument is also provided to link the phase portrait distortion with the extent and localization of damage(s).

Keywords

Phase portrait Mahalanobis distance structural interrogation statistical robustness noise immunity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Doebling

Farrar

Prime

et al . A review of damage identification methods that examine changes in dynamic properties. Shock Vib Digest 1998; 30(2): 91–105.

Sohn

Farrar

Hemez

et al . A review of structural health monitoring literature: 1996–2001. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2003.

Salawu

OS.

Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Eng Struct 1997; 19(9): 718–723.

Pandey

Biswas

Samman

MM.

Damage detection from changes in curvature mode shapes. J Sound Vib 1991; 145(2): 321–332.

Nair

Kiremidjian

Law

. Time series-based damage detection and localization algorithm with application to the ASCE benchmark structure. J Sound Vib 2006; 291(1–2): 349–368.

Hou

Noori

St. Amand

Wavelet-based approach for structural damage detection. J Eng Mech 2000; 126(7): 677–683.

Nichols

JM.

Structural health monitoring of offshore structures using ambient excitation. Appl Ocean Res 2003; 25: 101–114.

Todd

Nichols

Pecora

et al . Vibration based damage assessment utilizing state space geometry changes: local attractor variance ratio. Smart Mater Struct 2001; 10: 1000–1008.

Chelidze

Liu

Multidimensional damage identification based on phase space warping: an experimental study. Nonlinear Dynam 2006; 46: 61–72.

10.

Nie

Hao

Using vibration phase space topology changes for structural damage detection. Struct Health Monit 2012; 11(5): 538–557.

11.

Nie

Hao

Structural damage detection based on the reconstructed phase space for reinforced concrete slab: experimental study. J Sound Vib 2013; 332: 1061–1078.

12.

Overbey

Olson

Todd

MD.

A parametric investigation of state-space-based prediction error methods with stochastic excitation for structural health monitoring. Smart Mater Struct 2007; 16: 1621–1638.

13.

Liu

Mao

Todd

et al . Damage assessment with state-space embedding strategy and singular value decomposition under stochastic excitation. Struct Health Monit 2014; 13(2): 131–142.

14.

Torkamani

Butcher

Todd

et al . Hyperchaotic probe for damage identification using nonlinear prediction error. Mech Syst Signal Process 2012; 29: 457–473.

15.

Mahalanobis

PC.

On the generalized distance in statistics. Proc Natl Inst Sci India 1936; 2(1): 49–55.

16.

Banerjee

Qing

Beard

et al . Prediction of progressive damage state at the hot spots using statistical estimation. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2010; 21(6): 595–605.

17.

Takens

Detecting strange attractors in turbulence. In: Rand

Young

(eds) Lecture notes in mathematics. Berlin: Springer, 1981, vol. 898, pp. 366–381.

18.

Whitney

Differentiable manifolds. Ann Math 1936; 37: 645–680.

19.

Moon

FC.

Chaotic vibrations: an introduction for applied scientists and engineers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2004.

20.

Kareem

Numerical simulation of wind effects: a probabilistic perspective. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod 2008; 96: 1472–1497.

21.

Shinozuka

Jan

CM.

Digital simulation of random processes and its applications. J Sound Vib 1972; 25(10): 111–128.

22.

Kwon

Kareem

NatHaz on-line wind simulator (NOWS): simulation of Gaussian multivariate wind fields. NatHaz Modeling Laboratory Report University of Notre Dame, 2006, http://windsim.ce.nd.edu/

23.

Davenport

AG.

The dependence of wind load upon meteorological parameters. In: Proceedings of the international research seminar on wind effects on building and structure. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1968, pp. 19–82.

24.

Fraser

Swinney

HL.

Independent coordinates for strange attractors from mutual information. Phys Rev A 1986; 33(2): 1134–1140.

25.

Trickey

Todd

Nichols

et al . Considerations for attractor property analysis in vibration based damage detection. In: Proceedings of the SPIE5047, San Diego, CA, July 31, 2003, pp. 340–349.

26.

Nerenberg

MAH

Essex

. Correlation dimension and systematic geometric effects. Phys Rev A 1990; 42: 7065–7074.

27.

Stark

Broomhead

Davies

et al . Embedding theorems for forced and stochastic systems. Nonlinear Anal Theor Meth Appl 1997; 30(8): 5303–5314.

28.

Orstavik

Stark

Reconstruction and cross-prediction in coupled map lattices using spatio-temporal embedding techniques. Phys Letts A 1998; 247: 145–160.

29.

http://people.revoledu.com/kardi/tutorial/Similarity/MahalanobisDistance.html#MahalanobisDistance

30.

Nassif

Gindy

Davis

Comparison of laser Doppler vibrometer with contact sensors for monitoring bridge deflection and vibration. NDT&E Int 2005; 38(3): 213–218.

31.

Feng

Model updating of railway bridge using in situ dynamic displacement measurement under train loads. J Bridge Eng 2015; 20: 04015019.

32.

George

Mishra

SK.

Structural interrogation using phase space topology of the wind induced responses. J Vib Contr. Epub ahead of print 5 April 2017. DOI: 10.1177/1077546317701661.

33.

Paul

George

Mishra

SK.

Phase space interrogation of the empirical response modes for seismically excited structures. Mech Syst Signal Process 2016; 91: 250–265.