Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Damage detection in nonlinear vibrating structures using model updating

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents two distinct model updating strategies for dynamical systems with local nonlinearities based on acceleration time history responses measured spatially across the vibrating structure. Both linear and nonlinear parameters are calibrated by minimizing the selected metric based on measured and predicted response using the newly proposed variant of differential search algorithm named as multi-cluster hybrid adaptive differential search (MCHADS) algorithm. The first model updating strategy involves the decoupling of linear and nonlinear characteristics of the system. In this scheme, we first establish the dynamic stiffness matrix using input and output measurements and then the underlying linear system is alone updated using it. Later, localization of the nonlinear attachment is attempted using the inverse property of the FRF of the nonlinear system and the established dynamic stiffness matrix of the underlying linear system from the previous step. Once the linear system is updated and with the already identified location(s) of nonlinear attachment(s), the nonlinear parameters are identified by formulating it as an optimization problem using the proposed MCHADS algorithm. The major advantage of the first approach is the reduction of the complex problem of nonlinear model updating to linear model updating. The second approach involves updating both linear and nonlinear parameters simultaneously using the proposed MCHADS algorithm. Investigations have been carried out by solving several numerically simulated examples and also with the experimental data of a benchmark problem to evaluate the effectiveness of the two proposed nonlinear model updating strategies. Further, investigations are also carried out to evaluate the capability of the model updating approaches towards damage identification in initially healthy nonlinear systems. Conclusions are drawn based on these investigations, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the two model updating approaches

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aykan M, Özgüven HN (2013) Parametric identification of nonlinearity in structural systems using describing function inversion. Mech Syst Signal Process 40(1):356–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ghiasi R, Fathnejat H, Torkzadeh P (2019) A three-stage damage detection method for large-scale space structures using forward substructuring approach and enhanced bat optimization algorithm. Eng Comput 35(3):857–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gomes GF, de Almeida FA, Ancelotti AC Jr, da Cunha Jr SS (2020) Inverse structural damage identification problem in CFRP laminated plates using SFO algorithm based on strain fields. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01027-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gomes GF, Giovani RS (2020) An efficient two-step damage identification method using sunflower optimization algorithm and mode shape curvature (MSDBI–SFO). Eng Comput 4:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01128-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jin SS, Park YS, Kim S, Park YH (2020) Model updating based on mixed-integer nonlinear programming under model-form uncertainty in finite element model. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01030-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kerschen G, Worden K, Vakakis AF, Golinval JC (2006) Past, present and future of nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Process 20(3):505–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Silva SD, Cogan S, Foltête E, Buffe F (2009) Metrics for nonlinear model updating in structural dynamics. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 31(1):27–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hemez FM, Doebling SW (2001) Review and assessment of model updating for non-linear, transient dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Process 15(1):45–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schultz JF, Hemez FM (2000) Statistical based non-linear model updating using feature extraction. Los Alamos National Lab, NM (US)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schmidt R (1994) Updating non-linear components. Mech Syst Signal Process 8(6):679–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Meyer S, Link M (2003) Modelling and updating of local non-linearities using frequency response residuals. Mech Syst Signal Process 17(1):219–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang ZC, Xin Y, Ren WX (2015) Nonlinear structural model updating based on instantaneous frequencies and amplitudes of the decomposed dynamic responses. Eng Struct 1(100):189–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kurt M, Eriten M, McFarland DM, Bergman LA, Vakakis AF (2015) Methodology for model updating of mechanical components with local nonlinearities. J Sound Vib 24(357):331–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Peter S, Grundler A, Reuss P, Gaul L, Leine RI (2016) Towards finite element model updating based on nonlinear normal modes. Nonlinear dynamics, vol 1. Springer, Cham, pp 209–217

    Google Scholar 

  15. Prawin J, Rao ARM, Lakshmi K (2016) Nonlinear parametric identification strategy combining reverse path and hybrid dynamic quantum particle swarm optimization. Nonlinear Dyn 84(2):797–815

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Friswell M, Mottershead JE (2013) Finite element model updating in structural dynamics. Springer Science & Business Media

  17. Canbaloğlu G, Özgüven HN (2016) Model updating of nonlinear structures from measured FRFs. Mech Syst Signal Process 1(80):282–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kerschen G, Lenaerts V, Golinval JC (2003) Identification of a continuous structure with a geometrical non-linearity. Part I: conditioned reverse path method. J Sound Vib 262(4):889–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Muhamad P, Sims ND, Worden K (2012) On the orthogonalised reverse path method for nonlinear system identification. J Sound Vib 331(20):4488–4503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Herrera CA, McFarland DM, Bergman LA, Vakakis AF (2017) Methodology for nonlinear quantification of a flexible beam with a local, strong nonlinearity. J Sound Vib 3(388):298–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lin RM, Zhu J (2006) Model updating of damped structures using FRF data. Mech Syst Signal Process 20(8):2200–2218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pilkey DF. Computation of a damping matrix for finite element model updating (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech)

  23. Björck Ȧ, Golub GH (1973) Numerical methods for computing angles between linear subspaces. Math Comput 27(123):579–594

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Civicioglu P (2012) Transforming geocentric cartesian coordinates to geodetic coordinates by using differential search algorithm. Comput Geosci 1(46):229–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu B (2014) Composite differential search algorithm. J Appl Math 1:2014

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu J, Wu C, We G, Wang X (2015) A novel differential search algorithm and applications for structure design. Appl Math Comput 268:246–269

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Kelley CT (1999) Detection and remediation of stagnation in the Nelder-Mead algorithm using a sufficient decrease condition. SIAM J Optim 10(1):43–55

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Rao ARM, Appa Rao TV, Dattaguru B (2004) Generating optimised partitions for parallel finite element computations employing float-encoded genetic algorithms. Comput Model Eng Sci 5(3):213–234

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Rao ARM, Arvind N (2005) A scatter search algorithm for stacking sequence optimisation of laminate composites. Compos Struct 70(4):383–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rao ARM, Lakshmi K, Ganesan K (2013) Structural system identification using quantum behaved particle swarm optimisation algorithm. Struct Durability Health Monit 9(2):99–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rao ARM, Lakshmi K, Kumar SK (2015) Detection of delamination in laminated composites with limited measurements combining PCA and dynamic QPSO. Adv Eng Softw 86:85–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rao ARM (2009) Parallel mesh-partitioning algorithms for generating shape optimised partitions using evolutionary computing. Adv Eng Softw 40(2):141–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jayalakshmi V, Rao ARM (2017) Simultaneous identification of damage and input dynamic force on the structure for structural health monitoring. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55(6):2211–2238

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Lakshmi K, Rao ARM (2015) Optimal design of laminate composite plates using dynamic hybrid adaptive harmony search algorithm. J Reinf Plast Compos 34(6):493–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Alhalabi W, Dragoi EN (2017) Influence of randomization strategies and problem characteristics on the performance of differential search algorithm. Appl Soft Comput 61:88–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Alsaadi AA, Alhalabi W, Dragoi E-N (2019) Performance analysis: differential search algorithm based on randomization and benchmark functions. Data Technol Appl. https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-05-2018-0043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yang X-S, Gandomi AH (2012) Bat algorithm: a novel approach for global engineering optimization. Eng Comput 29(5):464–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Rashedi E, Nezamabadi-pour H, Saryazdi S (2009) GSA: a gravitational search algorithm. Inform Sci 179(13):2232–2248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kammer DC (2005) Sensor set expansion for modal vibration testing. Mech Syst Signal Process 19(4):700–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rao ARM, Anandakumar G (2007) Optimal placement of sensors for structural system identification and health monitoring using a hybrid swarm intelligence technique. Smart Mater Struct 16(6):2658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yatim NHM, Muhamad P, Abu A (2017) Conditioned reverse path method on frame structure for damage detection. J Telecommun Electron Comput Eng 9(1–4):49–53

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is being published with the permission of the Director, CSIR- SERC, Chennai.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIR-Structural Engineering Research Centre, CSIR Campus, Chennai, TN, India

    J. Prawin, A. Rama Mohan Rao & K. Lakshmi

Authors
  1. J. Prawin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Rama Mohan Rao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Lakshmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Prawin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prawin, J., Rama Mohan Rao, A. & Lakshmi, K. Damage detection in nonlinear vibrating structures using model updating. Engineering with Computers 38, 3567–3594 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-021-01397-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-021-01397-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation