Anomaly recognition and early warning of monitoring data are of great significance in the field of modern dam safety management. Multidimensional least-squares regression model with the Pauta criterion is a well-known traditional method, but it is easy to misjudge the normal value and miss the outliers. Thereby, an online robust recognition and early warning model combining robust statistics and confidence interval is proposed to detect outliers. The threshold is set based on the derived confidence interval and the scale estimator (derived from the location M-estimator). Monitoring data obtained from a gravity dam and a rockfill dam were taken as examples to demonstrate the robust recognition and early warning model. The results show that the proposed method can effectively improve the reliability of anomaly recognition and early warnings, which is valuable in engineering applications.
FanelliM. Control of dam displacements. Energia Elettrica1975; 52: 125–139.
2.
SalazarFMoránRToledoMÁ, et al. Data-based models for the prediction of dam behaviour: a review and some methodological considerations. Arch Comput Method E2017; 24(1): 1–21.
3.
GeudesQCoelhoP. Statistical behavior model of dams. In: Proceedings of the 15th ICOLD congress, Lausanne, 24–28 June 1985. Paris: ICOLD.
4.
HuDXZhouZQLiY, et al. Dam safety analysis based on stepwise regression model. Adv Mater Res2011; 204–210: 2158–2161.
5.
NguyenLHGouletJA. Anomaly detection with the switching Kalman Filter for structural health monitoring. Struct Control Hlth2018(2): e2136.
6.
MataJ. Interpretation of concrete dam behaviour with artificial neural network and multiple linear regression models. Eng Struct2011; 33(3): 903–910.
7.
XuCYueDDengC. Hybrid GA/SIMPLS as alternative regression model in dam deformation analysis. Eng Appl Artif Intel2012; 25(3): 468–475.
8.
MaazioP. Behavior of Enel’s large dam. Enel’s report, Roma, 1980.
9.
BonadliPFanelliMGiuseppttiG. Automatic observation and instantaneous control of dam safety. ISMES,1980.
10.
ChengLZhengD. Two online dam safety monitoring models based on the process of extracting environmental effect. Adv Eng Softw2013; 57(1): 48–56.
11.
SalazarFToledoMÁGonzálezJM, et al. Early detection of anomalies in dam performance: a methodology based on boosted regression trees. Struct Control Hlth2017; 24(11): e2012.
JungISBergesMGarrettJH, et al. Interpreting the dynamics of embankment dams through a time-series analysis of piezometer data using a non-parametric spectral estimation method. In: Proceedings of the ASCE international workshop on computing in civil engineering, Los Angeles, CA, 23–25 June 2013, pp. 25–32. Reston, VA: ASCE.
14.
JungISBergesMGarrettJH. Anomaly detectionon piezometer data collected from embankment dams using physical model-based Simulation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on computing in civil and building engineering, Orlando, FL, 23–25 June 2014, pp.1771–1778. ASCE 2014.
15.
PrakashGSadhuANarasimhanS, et al. Initial service life data towards structural health monitoring of a concrete arch dam. Struct Control Hlth2017; 25(6): 2036.
WordenKMansonG. The application of machine learning to structural health monitoring. Philos T R Soc B2007; 365(1851): 515.
18.
YingY. A data-driven framework for ultrasonic structural health monitoring of pipes. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, 2012.
19.
MaddalaGSYinY. 10 Outliers, unit roots and robust estimation of nonstationary time series. Handbook Stat1997; 15(97): 237–266.
20.
YangYSongLXuT. Robust estimator for correlated observations based on bifactor equivalent weights. J Geodesy2002; 76(6–7): 353–358.
21.
ErdoganH. The effects of additive outliers on time series components and robust estimation: a case study on the Oymapinar Dam, Turkey. Exp Techniques2012; 36(3): 39–52.
22.
WangRYYan-XiWUZi-YuMU, et al. Application of Kalman filtering algorithm based M-estimation in deformation monitoring of concrete gravity dam. Water Res Power2015; 12: 89–92 (in Chinese).
23.
TouatiFBenarabaN. Robust inversion method for jointly estimating parameters and variance components from heterogeneous monitoring data. Inverse Prob Sci Eng2017; 26: 530–552.
24.
HuberPJ. Robust estimation of a location parameter. Ann Math Stat1964; 35(1): 73–101.
25.
NowelK. Robust M-estimation in analysis of control network deformations: classical and new method. J Surv Eng2015; 141(4): 1–11.
26.
HabibiA. Kinetic study of an in situ inhibited polymerization using robust M-statistics. Chem Eng Res Des2009; 18(1A): 1–12.
27.
OstojskiMSGębalaJOrlińska-WoźniakP, et al. Implementation of robust statistics in the calibration, verification and validation step of model evaluation to better reflect processes concerning total phosphorus load occurring in the catchment. Ecol Model2016; 332: 83–93.
WillmGBeaujointN. Les me’thodes de surveillance des barrages au service de la production hydraulique d’Electricite’de France-Proble’mes ancients et solutions nouvelles. In: Proceedings of the 9th ICOLD Congres, Istanbul, 4–8 September 1967, pp. 529–550. Paris: ICOLD.
30.
StojanovicBMilivojevicMIvanovicM, et al. Adaptive system for dam behavior modeling based on linear regression and genetic algorithms. Adv Eng Softw2013; 65(10): 182–190.
31.
ICOLD. Methods of analysis for the prediction and the verification of dam behavior. Technical Report. Swiss Committee on Dams, 2003.
32.
RoehaMSerafimJL. A method of quantitative interpretation of the results obtained in the observation of dam. Technical Report Q21 R36, 1958. Paris: ICOLD, 1958.
33.
HuangHN. Actuality on the theory and technology of monitoring and controlling for dam safety. Large Dam Safety2005; 2: 54–57 (in Chinese).
34.
JiJWangJ. Gross error discrimination of monitoring data of hydraulic structure based on robust least-square regression method. Water Res Power2007; 6: 81–84 (in Chinese).
35.
AndrewsDFBickelPJHampelFR, et al. Robust estimates of location: survey and advances. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972.
36.
HampelFR. The influence curve and its role in robust estimation. J Am Stat Assoc, 1974, 69: 383–393.
37.
TukeyJ. Exploratory data analysis. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1977.
38.
HoaglinDC. Understanding robust and exploratory data analysis. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 1983.
39.
De SortisAPaolianiP. Statistical analysis and structural identification in concrete dam monitoring. Eng Struct2007; 29(1): 110–120.
40.
LégerPLeclercM. Hydrostatic, temperature, time-displacement model for concrete dams. J Eng Mech2007; 133(3): 267–277.
41.
MataJTavares de CastroASá da CostaJ. Constructing statistical models for arch dam deformation. Struct Control Hlth Monit2014; 21(3): 423–437.
42.
International Commission on Large Dams. Dam surveillance guide. Technical Report B-158, 2012. Paris: ICOLD.
43.
MaZYLiDWDongFW. Gross error elimination based on the polynomial least square method in integrated monitoring system of subway. J Electr Eng Technol2013; 12(1): 4145.
44.
LarsonRFarberB. Elementary statistics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000.
45.
YuHWuZRBaoTF, et al. Multivariate analysis in dam monitoring data with PCA. Sci China Technol Sci2010; 53(4): 1088–1097 (in Chinese).
46.
KartalMECavusliMGenisM. 3D nonlinear analysis of Atatürk clay core Rockfill dam considering settlement monitoring. Int J Geomech2019; 19(5): 1412.
47.
KimYSSeoMWLeeCW, et al. Deformation characteristics during construction and after impoundment of the CFRD-type Daegok dam. Korea Eng Geol2014; 178: 1–14.
48.
XuBZouDLiuH. Three dimensional simulation of the construction process of the Zipingpu concrete face rockfill dam based on a generalized plasticity model. Comput Geotech2012; 43: 143–154.
49.
YaziciBYolacanS. A comparison of various tests of normality. J Stat Comput Simul2007; 77(2): 175–183.
