The optimal sensor placement is critical to ensure the integrity of the aircraft composite structures. The active piezoelectric sensors are crucial due to their ability to detect damage through guided wave (GW). However, the current optimization methods for piezoelectric sensor placement do not consider the simultaneous monitoring of the global and local critical areas of damage. Therefore, this study aims at performing the optimal placement of piezoelectric sensors by considering objective constraints and a combination of features that quantify the criticality of different parts of the structure and the global scanning ability of the GW. A novel global-local optimization model incorporating multiple constraints is proposed. It enhances the monitoring ability of the regional and global damage, and optimizes the placement of a limited number of piezoelectric sensors. The feasibility, accuracy, and practicality of the proposed approach are then verified using numerical and experimental cases. Furthermore, the performance of the proposed model is compared with that of public traditional models. The obtained results show the outperformance of the proposed approach.
KammerDC. Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures. J Guid Control Dyn1991; 14: 251–259.
2.
YaoLSetharesWAKammerDC. Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification via a genetic algorithm. AIAA J1993; 31: 1922–1928.
3.
RicciFMonacoEBoffaN, et al. Guided waves for structural health monitoring in composites: a review and implementation strategies. Prog Aerosp Sci2022; 129: 100790.
4.
MallardoVAliabadiM. Optimal sensor placement for structural, damage and impact identification: a review. Struct Durab Health Monit2013; 9: 287–323.
5.
MallardoVAliabadiMKhodaeiZS. Optimal sensor positioning for impact localization in smart composite panels. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2013; 24: 559–573.
6.
SomanRKudelaPBalasubramaniamK, et al. A study of sensor placement optimization problem for guided wave-based damage detection. Sensors2019; 19: 1856.
7.
LinFYChiuP-L. A near-optimal sensor placement algorithm to achieve complete coverage-discrimination in sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett2005; 9: 43–45.
8.
EwaldVGrovesRBenedictusR. Integrative approach for transducer positioning optimization for ultrasonic structural health monitoring for the detection of deterministic and probabilistic damage location. Struct Health Monit2021; 20: 1117–1144.
9.
DingXWangXYuY, et al. Adaptive guided wave-based damage identification under unknown load conditions. Struct Health Monit2023; 22: 78–104.
10.
GiurgiutiuV. Structural health monitoring: with piezoelectric wafer active sensors. Elsevier, 2007.
11.
MitraMGopalakrishnanS. Guided wave based structural health monitoring: a review. Smart Mater Struct2016; 25: 053001.
12.
DingXWangXChenW. Sequential quantification strategy of delamination in composite laminate via collaborative active and passive monitoring. Mech Syst Signal Process2022; 166: 108458.
13.
SuZYeLLuY. Guided Lamb waves for identification of damage in composite structures: a review. J Sound Vibr2006; 295: 753–780.
14.
HassaniSDackermannU. A systematic review of optimization algorithms for structural health monitoring and optimal sensor placement. Sensors2023; 23: 3293.
15.
StawiarskiAMucA. On transducers localization in damage detection by wave propagation method. Sensors2019; 19: 1937.
16.
StaszewskiWJWordenKWardleR, et al. Fail-safe sensor distributions for impact detection in composite materials. Smart Mater Struct2000; 9: 298.
17.
MarkmillerJFChangF-K. Sensor network optimization for a passive sensing impact detection technique. Struct Health Monit2010; 9: 25–39.
18.
FlynnEBToddMD. Optimal placement of piezoelectric actuators and sensors for detecting damage in plate structures. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2010; 21: 265–274.
19.
HaynesCM. Effective health monitoring strategies for complex structures. San Diego, CA: University of California, 2014.
20.
VanliOAZhangCNguyenA, et al. A minimax sensor placement approach for damage detection in composite structures. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2012; 23: 919–932.
21.
IsmailZMustaphaSFakihMA, et al. Sensor placement optimization on complex and large metallic and composite structures. Struct Health Monit2020; 19: 262–280.
22.
IsmailZMustaphaSTarhiniH. Optimization of PZT Wafers’ placement with enhanced level of robustness using multiple interacting networks. Mech Syst Signal Process2023; 195: 110283.
23.
Cantero-ChinchillaSChiachíoJChiachíoM, et al. Optimal sensor configuration for ultrasonic guided-wave inspection based on value of information. Mech Syst Signal Process2020; 135: 106377.
24.
Cantero-ChinchillaSPapadimitriouCChiachíoJ, et al. Robust optimal sensor configuration using the value of information. Struct Control Health Monit2022; 29: e3143.
25.
DarajiAHYeJHaleJM. Optimisation of active SHM system based on optimal number and placement of piezoelectric transducers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2023; 34: 425–439.
26.
LeeBStaszewskiW. Sensor location studies for damage detection with Lamb waves. Smart Mater Struct2007; 16: 399.
27.
EwaldVGrovesRMBenedictusR. Transducer placement option of Lamb wave SHM system for hotspot damage monitoring. Aerospace2018; 5: 39.
28.
DasSChattopadhyayAZhouX. Acoustic based structural health monitoring for composites using optimal sensor placement: analysis and experiments. J Reinf Plast Compos2009; 28: 83–97.
29.
ThieneMKhodaeiZSAliabadiM. Optimal sensor placement for maximum area coverage (MAC) for damage localization in composite structures. Smart Mater Struct2016; 25: 095037.
30.
SalmanpourMSharif KhodaeiZAliabadiM. Transducer placement optimisation scheme for a delay and sum damage detection algorithm. Struct Control Health Monit2017; 24: e1898.
31.
MaYWangXWangL, et al. Non-probabilistic interval model-based system reliability assessment for composite laminates. Comput Mech2019; 64: 829–845.
32.
WangXShiQFanW, et al. Comparison of the reliability-based and safety factor methods for structural design. Appl Math Modell2019; 72: 68–84.
33.
MaYWangXShiQ, et al. Coordinative optimization method of composite laminated structures based on system reliability. Struct Multidiscip Optim2019; 59: 1483–1501.
34.
DingXWangXLiuY. Adaptive alternating Lipschitz search method for structural analysis with unknown-but-bounded uncertainties. Appl Math Modell2020; 77: 983–999.
35.
JonesAEForbesG. An adaptive simulated annealing algorithm for global optimization over continuous variables. J Global Optim1995; 6: 1–37.
36.
TanYZhangL. Computational methodologies for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring: a review. Struct Health Monit2020; 19: 1287–1308.
37.
HayTRoyerRGaoH, et al. A comparison of embedded sensor Lamb wave ultrasonic tomography approaches for material loss detection. Smart Mater Struct2006; 15: 946.
38.
DingXWangXLiY, et al. Two-step damage identification method for composite laminates using distributed piezoelectric and strain sensors. Struct Control Health Monit2022; 29: e2913.
