1996
DOI: 10.2514/3.21688
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal sensor placement for modal identification using system-realization methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After output selection, the outputs that are needed to accurately describe the system are known, but a model still has to be derived. As in Kammer (1996), the derived output sets may be well suited for modeling, but not for control where the outputs may have di!erent tasks. This is also recognized by Roh and Park (1997), who consider actuator selection for control and for identi"cation, using di!erent criteria depending on the task.…”
Section: Ezciency Of Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…After output selection, the outputs that are needed to accurately describe the system are known, but a model still has to be derived. As in Kammer (1996), the derived output sets may be well suited for modeling, but not for control where the outputs may have di!erent tasks. This is also recognized by Roh and Park (1997), who consider actuator selection for control and for identi"cation, using di!erent criteria depending on the task.…”
Section: Ezciency Of Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is also recognized by Roh and Park (1997), who consider actuator selection for control and for identi"cation, using di!erent criteria depending on the task. In Kammer (1996), the criterion for selecting sensors for modal identi"cation of #exible structures is maximization of the determinant of the observability Gramian, which is also among the criteria proposed by MuK ller and Weber (1972) for selecting control sensors.…”
Section: Ezciency Of Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [14] it is shown that the EfI method produces a final set that is optimal from a system observability perspective. Thus, rejecting sensors that were in fact selected by EfI will result in an less optimal system observability, but this is again a consequence of the candidate set containing duplicate information.…”
Section: Gramian Based Rejectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To this end, the blades are clamped at the root and are subjected to three point forces; two tip forces in the flapwise and edgewise directions, and a point force in the flapwise direction at the node aimed at introducing strong torsional motion. In the baseline model, the Effective Independence [13] (EI) indices are computed to select a set of 50 output directions in which the mode shapes with natural frequency below 8 Hz are well identifiable. In the beam model, a corresponding set of output nodes is created and connected to the blade pitch axis using mass-less beam elements, shown in Fig.…”
Section: Model Updating Of the Beam Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%