Gaussian mixture model–based path-synthesis accumulation imaging of guided wave for damage monitoring of aircraft composite structures under temperature variation
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online January, 2019
Gaussian mixture model–based path-synthesis accumulation imaging of guided wave for damage monitoring of aircraft composite structures under temperature variation
With the capabilities of achieving large-scale monitoring, improving signal-to-noise ratio, and obtaining a high localization accuracy and strong fault tolerance, guided wave and piezoelectric sensor network–based damage imaging technique seems to be the key technique to realize damage localization of complex aircraft composite structures. However, aircraft structures usually work under random and complicated time-varying conditions, which may introduce nonnegligible uncertainties in the acquired guided wave signals and mask the subtle changes caused by damage. The current damage imaging methods barely consider this time-varying issue and are unable to reliably locate damage. To increase reliability, a Gaussian mixture model–based guided wave path-synthesis accumulation imaging method is proposed for damage imaging of complex aircraft composite structures under time-varying conditions. The Gaussian mixture model is used to suppress time-varying influence and achieve time-varying-independent damage characterization, based on which the guided wave path-synthesis imaging is conducted to perform the fusion of sensor network information and generate an image. During the monitoring process, a series of images will be generated with damage information accumulated, and the damage will gradually emerge in these images and can be located eventually. The typical time-varying condition, temperature variation, is chosen to verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method on a stiffened carbon fiber composite plate; the results show good performance of reliable damage imaging and localization within a temperature range from 0°C to 60°C.
BollerCChangFKFujinoY.Encyclopedia of structural health monitoring. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
3.
DiamantiKSoutisC.Structural health monitoring techniques for aircraft composite structures. Prog Aerosp Sci2010; 46(8): 342–352.
4.
GiurgiutiuVSoutisC.Enhanced composites integrity through structural health monitoring. Appl Compos Mater2012; 19(5): 813–829.
5.
HeJJZhouYBGuanXFet al. An integrated health monitoring method for structural fatigue life evaluation using limited sensor data. Materials2016; 9(11): 894.
6.
SuZQYeLLuY.Guided Lamb waves for identification of damage in composite structures: a review. J Sound Vib2006; 295: 753–780.
7.
HaynesCToddMDFlynnEet al. Statistically-based damage detection in geometrically-complex structures using ultrasonic interrogation. Struct Health Monit2013; 12(2): 141–152.
8.
OstachowiczWGüemesA.New trends in structural health monitoring. Berlin: Springer, 2013.
9.
ZhouCSuZQChengL.Probability-based diagnostic imaging using hybrid features extracted from ultrasonic Lamb wave signals. Smart Mater Struct2011; 20(12): 125005.
10.
ZhaoXGaoHZhangGet al. Active health monitoring of an aircraft wing with embedded piezoelectric sensor/actuator network: I. Defect detection, localization and growth monitoring. Smart Mater Struct2007; 16(4): 1208.
11.
HallJSMichaelsJE.Computational efficiency of ultrasonic guided wave imaging algorithms. IEEE T Ultrason Ferr2011; 58(1): 21244993.
12.
QiuLLiuMQingXPet al. A quantitative multidamage monitoring method for large-scale complex composite. Struct Health Monit2013; 12(3): 183–196.
13.
ParkHWKimSBSohnH.Understanding a time reversal process in Lamb wave propagation. Wave Motion2009; 46(7): 451–467.
14.
WangCHRoseJTChangFK.A synthetic time-reversal imaging method for structural health monitoring. Smart Mater Struct2004; 13(2): 415.
15.
HumeidaYWilcoxPDToddMDet al. A probabilistic approach for the optimisation of ultrasonic array inspection techniques. NDT&E Int2014; 68: 43–52.
16.
YuLGiurgiutiuV.In situ 2-D piezoelectric wafer active sensors arrays for guided wave damage detection. Ultrasonics2008; 48(2): 117–134.
17.
ZhongYTYuanSFQiuL.Multiple damage detection on aircraft composite structures using near-field MUSIC algorithm. Sensor Actuat A: Phys2014; 214: 234–244.
18.
HeJSwamyMNSAhmadMO.Efficient application of MUSIC algorithm under the coexistence of far-field and near-field sources. IEEE T Signal Process2012; 60(4): 2066–2070.
19.
PurekarASPinesDJ.Damage detection in thin composite laminates using piezoelectric phased sensor arrays and guided Lamb wave interrogation. J Intel Mat Syst Str2010; 21(10): 995–1010.
20.
QiuLLiuBYuanSFet al. A scanning spatial-wavenumber filter and PZT 2-D cruciform array based on-line damage imaging method of composite structure. Sensor Actuat A: Phys2016; 248: 62–72.
21.
SohnH.Effects of environmental and operational variability on structural health monitoring. Philos T Roy Soc A2007; 365(1851): 539–560.
22.
LopezISarigul-KlijnN.A review of uncertainty in flight vehicle structural damage monitoring, diagnosis and control: challenges and opportunities. Prog Aerosp Sci2010; 46(7): 247–273.
23.
CrossEJMansonGWordenKet al. Features for damage detection with insensitivity to environmental and operational variations. Proc R Soc A2012; 468: 4098–4122.
24.
DworakowskiZAmbrozinskiLStepinskiT.Multi-stage temperature compensation method for Lamb wave measurements. J Sound Vib2016; 382: 328–339.
25.
SupreetKMichaelsJEHarleyJB.Robust baseline subtraction for ultrasonic full wavefield analysis. AIP Conf Proc2017; 1806(1): 020005.
26.
CroxfordJMollJWilcoxPDet al. Efficient temperature compensation strategies for guided wave structural health monitoring. Ultrasonics2010; 50(4–5): 517–528.
27.
ClarkeTSimonettiFCawleyP.Guided wave health monitoring of complex structures by sparse array systems: influence of temperature changes on performance. J Sound Vib2010; 329(12): 2306–2322.
28.
MichaelsJE.Sparse array imaging with guided waves under variable environmental conditions. Duxford: Woodhead Publishing, 2016, pp. 255–284.
29.
MichaelsJE.Detection, localization and characterization of damage in plates with an in situ array of spatially distributed ultrasonic sensors. Smart Mater Struct2008; 17(3): 035035.
30.
OstiguyPCLe DuffAQuaegebeurNet al. In situ characterization technique to increase robustness of imaging approaches in structural health monitoring using guided waves. Struct Health Monit2014; 13(5): 525–536.
31.
FendziCRebillatMMechbalNet al. A data-driven temperature compensation approach for Structural Health Monitoring using Lamb waves. Struct Health Monit2016; 15(5): 525–540.
32.
WangQYangSF.Baseline-free imaging method based on new PZT sensor arrangements. J Intel Mat Syst Str2009; 20(14): 1663–1673.
33.
LeeSJGandhiNHallJSet al. Baseline-free guided wave imaging via adaptive source removal. Struct Health Monit2012; 11(4): 472–481.
34.
HettlerJTabatabaeipourMDelrueSet al. Linear and nonlinear guided wave imaging of impact damage in CFRP using a probabilistic approach. Materials2016; 9(11): 901.
35.
ReyndersEWurstenGDe RoeckG.Output-only structural health monitoring in changing environmental conditions by means of nonlinear system identification. Struct Health Monit2014; 13(1): 82–93.
36.
OhCKSohnH.Damage diagnosis under environmental and operational variations using unsupervised support vector machine. J Sound Vib2009; 325(1): 224–239.
37.
FarrarCRWordenK.Structural health monitoring: a machine learning perspective. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
38.
BanerjeeSQingXPBeardSet al. Prediction of progressive damage state at the hot spots using statistical estimation. J Intel Mat Syst Str2010; 21(6): 595–605.
39.
ChakrabortyDKovvaliNPapandreou-SuppappolaAet al. An adaptive learning damage estimation method for structural health monitoring. J Intel Mat Syst Str2015; 26(2): 125–143.
40.
Avendaño-ValenciaLDFassoisSD.Damage/fault diagnosis in an operating wind turbine under uncertainty via a vibration response Gaussian mixture random coefficient model based framework. Mech Syst Signal Pr2017; 91: 326–353.
41.
SantosASilvaMSantosRet al. A global expectation-maximization based on memetic swarm optimization for structural damage detection. Struct Health Monit2016; 15(5): 610–625.
42.
QiuLYuanSFChangFKet al. On-line updating Gaussian mixture model for aircraft wing spar damage evaluation under time-varying boundary condition. Smart Mater Struct2014; 23(12): 125001.
43.
QiuLYuanSFBaoQet al. Crack propagation monitoring in a full-scale aircraft fatigue test based on guided wave-Gaussian mixture model. Smart Mater Struct2016; 25(5): 055048.
44.
BilmesJA.A gentle tutorial of the EM algorithm and its application to parameter estimation for Gaussian mixture and hidden Markov models. Report 97–021, International Computer Science Institute, University of California, Berkley, CA, 1998.
45.
HastieTTibshiraniRFreidmanJ.The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference and prediction. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 371–406.
46.
GoldbergerJGordonSGreenspanH. An efficient image similarity measure based on approximations of KL-divergence between two Gaussian mixtures. In: Proceedings of the ninth IEEE international conference on computer vision, Nice, 1–8 December 2013. New York: IEEE.
47.
QiuLYuanSF.On development of a multi-channel PZT array scanning system and its evaluating application on UAV wing box. Sensor Actuat A: Phys2009; 151(2): 220–230.
48.
SohnHParkGWaitJRet al. Wavelet-based active sensing for delamination detection in composite structures. Smart Mater Struct2003; 13(1): 153.
49.
YuJ.Machine tool condition monitoring based on an adaptive Gaussian mixture model. J Manuf Sci E: T ASME2012; 134(3): 031004.
50.
LiuKHMaSYWuZJet al. A novel probability-based diagnostic imaging with weight compensation for damage localization using guided waves. Struct Health Monit2016; 15(2): 162–173.
