The structural health state of liquefied natural gas (LNG) wharf is important for the docking and operation of LNG ships. Based on the finite element modal analysis (FEMA) and evidential reasoning (ER) rule, a new health assessment model for the LNG wharf is proposed in this paper, where structural weak areas are considered. Firstly, combining the structural mechanism and FEMA, the LNG wharf is simulated and modeled. The weak areas of the wharf in common working modes are analyzed and obtained. Secondly, based on the analysis results, the sensor deployment is guided and the wharf health information is collected. Finally, based on the ER rule, the sensor monitoring information is fused to realize the health assessment of the wharf. This paper takes an LNG wharf in the Hainan Yangpu area of China as an example. The experimental results show that the proposed method can accurately and effectively assess the health state of the wharf.
ErikVPedroAIvanØ, et al. Analysing the risk of LNG carrier operations. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2008; 93(9): 1328–1344.
2.
NafdayAM. Public safety appraisal for siting marine liquefied natural gas terminals in California. J Energy Eng2015; 141(3): 04014023.
3.
AkyildizHMentesA. An integrated risk assessment based on uncertainty analysis for cargo vessel safety. Saf Sci2017; 92: 34–43.
4.
AnezirisONPapazoglouIAKonstantinidouM, et al. Integrated risk assessment for LNG terminals. J Loss Prev Process Ind2014; 28: 23–35.
5.
YuenKVKuokSC. Modeling of environmental influence in structural health assessment for reinforced concrete buildings. Earthq Eng Eng Vib2010; 9(2): 295–306.
6.
WuRTJahanshahiMR. Data fusion approaches for structural health monitoring and system identification: past, present, and future. Struct Health Monit2020; 19(2): 552–586.
7.
ZengZDiMFZioE, et al. A hierarchical decision-making framework for the assessment of the prediction capability of prognostic methods. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk Reliability2017; 231(1): 36–52.
8.
JiaoZBTanHMMeiTT, et al. Numerical analysis on dynamic responses of the sheet-pile wharf with separated relieving platform under horizontal seismic loads. J Coast Res2015; 73(1): 270–276.
9.
SuJBYangGQZhangLM, et al. Safety evaluation method for high-piled wharf structures based on the disturbing-energy method. J Eng Mech2020; 146(6): 04020044.
10.
PanYZhangLWuX, et al. Structural health monitoring and assessment using wavelet packet energy spectrum. Saf Sci2019; 120: 652–665.
11.
YingHZhanLJFuCJ. Wharf risk assessment based on AHP & D-S evidence theory. Adv Mater Res2013; 2592: 769–773.
12.
LiuYLuNYinX, et al. An adaptive support vector regression method for structural system reliability assessment and its application to a cable-stayed bridge. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk Reliability2016; 230(2): 204–219.
13.
SayyedMVSaeedNMostafaAZ. Seismic reliability assessment of structures using artificial neural network. J Build Eng2017; 11: 230–235.
14.
LiuHBYingL. Safety evaluation of a long-span steel trestle with an extended service term age in a coastal port based on identification of modal parameters. Eng Lett2016; 24(1): 84–92.
15.
SalawuOS. Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Eng Struct1997; 19(9): 718–723.
16.
LiGLZhouZJHuCC, et al. A new safety assessment model for complex system based on the conditional generalized minimum variance and the belief rule base. Saf Sci2017; 93: 108–120.
17.
MousaviZVarahramSEttefaghMM, et al. Deep neural networks-based damage detection using vibration signals of finite element model and real intact state: an evaluation via a lab-scale offshore jacket structure. Struct Health Monit2021; 20: 379–405.
18.
LiX. ANSYS Application in modal analysis of bus body frame. Adv Mater Res2013; 605: 656–659.
19.
KarbhariVMGuanHSikorskyC. Operational modal analysis for vibration-based structural health monitoring of civil structures. In: Structural health monitoring of civil infrastructure systems. Cambridge: CRC Press; Woodhead Publishing, 2009, pp.213–259.
20.
DempsterAP. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann Appl Stat1967; 38(2): 325–339.
21.
ShaferGA. Mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.
YangJB. Rule and the utility-based evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainties. Eur J Oper Res2001; 131(1): 31–61.
24.
YangJBSinghMG. An evidential reasoning approach for multiple-attribute decision making with uncertainty. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber Syst1994; 24(1): 1–18.
25.
TangSWZhouZJHuCH, et al. A new evidential reasoning rule-based safety assessment method with sensor reliability for complex systems. IEEE Trans Cyber. Epub ahead of print 3 September 2020. DOI: 10.1109/TCYB.2020.3015664.
26.
ZhaoFJZhouZJHuCH, et al. A new evidential reasoning-based method for online safety assessment of complex systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber Syst2018; 48(6): 954–966.
27.
GB 50026-2007. Code for engineering surveying.
28.
JGJ 8-2007. Code for deformation measurement of building and structure.
