Many research groups in the structural health monitoring community have made efforts to utilize deep learning-based approaches for damage detection on a variety of structures. Among these approaches, structural damage detection through deep convolutional neural networks using raw structural response data has received great attention. However, structural responses are affected not only by structural properties but also by excitation characteristics. For detecting of structures’ damage under seismic excitations, different seismic excitations definitely cause varied structural responses data. In practice, it is impossible to accurately predict the characteristics of future seismic excitation for pre-training the deep convolutional neural network. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the autonomous detection of structural element damage subject to unknown seismic excitation. In this article, a new approach is proposed for detecting structural damage subject to unknown seismic excitation based on a convolutional neural network with wavelet-based transmissibility of structural response data. The transmissibility functions of structural response data are used to eliminate the influence of different seismic excitations. Moreover, contrary to the traditional Fourier transform in the conventional transmissibility function, wavelet-based transmissibility function is presented using the ability in subtle information acquisition of wavelet transform. The wavelet-based transmissibility data of structural responses are used as the inputs to constructed deep convolutional neural networks. Both a numerical simulation example and an experimental test are used to validate the performance of the proposed approach based on deep convolutional neural network.
DoeblingSWFarrarCRPrimeMB. A summary review of vibration-based damage identification methods. Shock Vib1998; 30(2): 91–105.
2.
FanWQiaoPZ. Vibration-based damage identification methods: a review and comparative study. Struct Health Monit2011; 10(1): 83–111.
3.
ZhangDYLiH. Loop substructure identification for shear structures of unknown structural mass using synthesized references. Smart Mater Struct2017; 26(8): 085046.
4.
ChangPCFlatauALiuSC. Review paper: Health monitoring of civil infrastructure. Struct Health Monit2003; 2(3): 257–267.
5.
SohnHFarrarCRHemezF, et al. A review of structural health monitoring literature. 1996–2001. Report no. LA-13976-MS. Los Alamos: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2002.
6.
LiuLJSuYZhuJJ, et al. Data fusion based EKF-UI for real-time simultaneous identification of structural systems and unknown external inputs. Measurement2016; 88: 456–467.
7.
LeiYChenFZhouH. A two-stage and two-step algorithm for the identification of structural damage and unknown excitations: numerical and experimental studies. Smart Struct Syst2015; 15(1): 57–80.
8.
LeiYJiangYQXuZQ. Structural damage detection with limited input and output measurement signals. Mech Syst Signal Pr2012; 28: 229–243.
9.
LiHTaoDWHuangY, et al. A data-driven approach for seismic damage detection of shear-type building structures using the fractal dimension of time-frequency features. Struct Control Health Monit2013; 20(9): 1191–1210.
10.
HouZNooriMAmandRS. Wavelet based approach for structural damage detection. J Eng Mech2000; 126(7): 677–683.
11.
LawSSLiXYZhuXQ, et al. Structural damage detection from wavelet packet sensitivity. Eng Struct2005; 27(9): 1339–1348.
12.
LeiYKiremidjianASNairKK, et al. Algorithms for time synchronization of wireless structural monitoring sensors. Earthq Eng Struct D2005; 34(6): 555–557.
13.
YangJNLeiYLinS, et al. Hilbert-Huang based approach for structural damage detection. J Eng Mech2004; 130(1): 85–95.
14.
BlachowskiBAnYHSpencerBF, et al. Axial strain accelerations approach for damage localization in statically determinate truss structures. Comput Aid Civ Inf2017; 32(4): 304–318.
15.
BaoYQChenZCWeiSY, et al. The state of the art of data science and engineering in structural health monitoring. Engineering2019; 5(2): 234–242.
16.
ZhaoRYanRQChenZH, et al. Deep learning and its applications to machine health monitoring. Mech Syst Signal Pr2019; 115: 213–237.
17.
KhanSYairiT. A review on the application of deep learning in system health management. Mech Syst Signal Pr2018; 107: 241–265.
18.
SalehiHBurguenoR. Emerging artificial intelligence methods in structural engineering. Eng Struct2018; 171: 170–189.
19.
YeXWJinTYunCB. A review on deep learning-based structural health monitoring of civil infrastructures. Smart Struct Syst2019; 24(5): 567–586.
20.
LeeSHaJZokhirovaM, et al. Background information of deep learning for structural engineering. Arch Comput Method E2018; 25(1): 121–129.
21.
HoskereVEickBSpencerBF, et al. Deep Bayesian neural networks for damage quantification in miter gates of navigation locks. Struct Health Monit. Epub ahead of print 5November2019. DOI: 10.1177/147592171982086.
22.
PathirageCSNLiJLiLWang, et al. Development and application of a deep learning-based sparse autoencoder framework for structural damage identification. Struct Health Monit2019; 18(1): 103–122.
23.
DongCZYeXWJinT. Identification of structural dynamic characteristics based on machine vision technology. Measurement2018; 126: 405–416.
24.
ChaYJChoiWBuyukozturkO. Deep learning-based crack damage detection using convolutional neural network. Comput Aid Civ Inf2017; 32(3): 2013–2026.
25.
XuYBaoYQChenJH, et al. Surface fatigue crack identification in steel box girder of bridges by a deep fusion convolutional neural network based on consumer-grade camera images. Struct Health Monit2019; 18(3): 653–674.
26.
BaoYQTangZYLiH, et al. Computer vision and deep learning-based data anomaly detection method for structural health monitoring. Struct Health Monit2019; 18(2): 401–421.
27.
FanGLiJHaoH. Lost data recovery for structural health monitoring based on convolutional neural networks. Struct Control Health Monit2019; 26(10): e2433.
28.
XuYWeiSYBaoYQ, et al. Automatic seismic damage identification of reinforced concrete columns from images by a region-based deep convolutional neural network. Struct Control Health Monit2019; 26(3): e2313.
29.
ChaYJChoiWSuhG, et al. Autonomous structural visual inspection using region-based deep learning for detecting multiple damage types. Comput Aid Civ Inf2018; 33: 731–747.
30.
RafieiMHAdeliH. A novel unsupervised deep learning model for global and local health condition assessment of structures. Eng Struct2018; 156: 598–607.
31.
YuYWangCYLiJC. A novel deep learning-based method for damage identification of smart building structures. Struct Health Monit2019; 18(1): 143–163.
32.
PathirageCSNLiJLiL, et al. Structural damage identification based on autoencoder neural networks and deep learning. Eng Struct2018; 172: 13–28.
33.
AbdeljaberOAvciOKiranyazS, et al. Real-time vibration-based structural damage detection using one-dimensional convolutional neural networks. J Sound Vib2017; 388: 154–170.
34.
AbdeljaberOAvciOMustafa Serkan KiranyazMS, et al. 1-D CNNs for structural damage detection: verification on a structural health monitoring benchmark data. Neurocomputing2018; 275: 1308–1317
35.
ZhangYQMiyamoriYMikamiS, et al. Vibration-based structural state identification by a 1-dimensional convolutional neural network . Comput Aid Civ Inf2019; 34(9): 822–839.
36.
LinYZNieZHMaHW. Structural damage detection with automatic feature-extraction through deep learning. Comput Aid Civ Inf2017; 32(12): 1025–1046.
37.
KhodabandehlouHPekcanGFadaliMS. Vibration-based structural condition assessment using convolution neural networks. Struct Control Health Monit2019; 26(2): e2308.
38.
WordenK. Structural fault detection using a novelty measure. J Sound Vib1997; 201(1): 85–101.
39.
JohnsonTJAdamsDE. Transmissibility as a differential indicator of structural damage. J Vib Acoust2002; 124(4): 634–641.
40.
MaiaNMMAlmeidaRABUrgueiraAPV, et al. Damage detection and quantification using transmissibility. Mech Syst Signal Pr2011; 25(7): 2475–2483.
41.
MeruaneV. Online sequential extreme learning machine for vibration-based damage assessment using transmissibility data. J Comput Civil Eng2015; 30: 04015042.
42.
LiJHaoHLoJV. Structural damage identification with power spectral density transmissibility: numerical and experimental studies. Smart Struct Syst2015; 15(1): 15–40.
43.
ZhuDPYiXHWangY. A local excitation and measurement approach for decentralized damage detection using transmissibility functions. Struct Control Health Monit2016; 23(3): 487–502.
44.
ChesneSDeraemaekerA. Damage localization using transmissibility functions: a critical review. Mech Syst Signal Pr2013; 38(2): 569–584.
45.
YanWJZhaoMYSunQ, et al. Transmissibility-based system identification for structural health monitoring: fundamentals, approaches, and applications. Mech Syst Signal Pr2019; 117: 453–482.
46.
FanZFengXZhouJ. A novel transmissibility concept based on wavelet transform for structural damage detection. Smart Struct Syst2013; 12(3–4): 291–308.
47.
LiXZDongXJPengZK, et al. Local variation detection in MDOF system using wavelet based transmissibility and its application in cracked beam. J Vib Control2017; 23(14): 2307–2327.
48.
LuoJLiGHuangZM. Damage detection for shear structures based on wavelet spectral transmissibility matrices under nonstationary stochastic excitation. Struct Control Health Monit2017; 24(1): e1862.
49.
AlomMZTahaTMYakopcicC, et al. A state-of-the-art survey on deep learning theory and architectures. Electronics2019; 8(3): 292.
50.
SrivastavaNHintonGKrizhevskyA, et al. Dropout: a Simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J Mach Learn Res2014; 15: 1929–1958.
51.
MaasALHannunAYNgAY. Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic models. In: Proceedings of the 30th international conference on machine learning (ICML), Atlanta, GA, 16–21 June 2013.
52.
LecunYBottouLBengioY, et al. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc IEEE1998; 86(11): 2278–2324.
ChengLRobertoPVanaliM, et al. Damage detection based on strain transmissibility for beam structure by using distributed fiber optics. In: ChristopherN (ed.) Structural health monitoring & damage detection, volume 7: proceedings of the 35th IMAC, a conference and exposition on structural dynamics. Berlin: Springer, 2017, pp. 27–40.
