Sensor placement methodologies for dynamic testing

Papadopoulos, Michael; Garcia, Ephraim

doi:10.2514/3.13806

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the error decreases with increased sensor count, also as expected. It should be reiterated that the sensor locations were not optimized in any way such that absolute values of are not as globally meaningful as relative values; it is possible that all the values presented in Table 1 can be reduced, perhaps even signi"cantly, merely by judicious sensor placement [19]. In any real measurement, a certain amount of error also arises, not due to model short-comings or even sensor density and placement issues, but rather due to inherent performance characteristics of the measurement device.…”

Section: Shape Reconstruction Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shear Deformation Correction to Transverse Shape Reconstruction From Distributed Strain Measurements

Todd

Vohra

1999

Journal of Sound and Vibration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Shape Reconstruction Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shear Deformation Correction to Transverse Shape Reconstruction From Distributed Strain Measurements

Todd

Vohra

1999

Journal of Sound and Vibration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…By this method, an optimal sensor set is selected based on the modal kinetic energy distribution, which gives a measure of the dynamic contribution of each finite element model (FEM) physical degree of freedom to each of the target mode shapes [13] .…”

Section: The Modal Kinetic Energy Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of the art of sensor placement methods in structural health monitoring

2006

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an overview of current research and development in the field of sensor placement methods in structural health monitoring. Due to the limitations of equipment facilities and cost, the number of sensors to be installed in a structure is relatively few. In many cases, three are always degrees of freedoms in a structure are not easily accessible, or eventually inaccessible. Moreover, actual structures are all continuous and have essentially infinite degrees of freedoms, therefore, it is impossible to instrument on all the degrees of freedoms. The methods of sensor placement are mainly dealing with accelerometers for global dynamic testing, or structural health monitoring. Three major concerns are discussed, the necessary number of sensors to be installed, where to deploy these sensors, and how to evaluate the effectiveness of these deployed sensors. Finally, a new loading dependent sensor placement method is proposed, and verified by the experimental data of a simple cantilever beam structure.

show abstract

“…The procedure of simultaneous selection is simple but suffers from a drawback in that excessive weighting is put on the elements with larger mesh and mass, which seems quite natural but becomes defective in some typical cases [24]. The basic principle should be based on a uniform distribution of the degrees of freedom over the entire structural system.…”

Section: Secondary Structural Subspacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The flexural vibration of a cantilever beam [24] was investigated for the assessment of selection optimality and solution accuracy in structural optimization and damage detection. The finite element model has 25 beam elements (15 small and 10 large) and 25 unconstrained nodes, as shown in figure 1.…”

Section: Baseline and Perturbed Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

System condensations for inverse problems of linear dynamic structures

Kim

Choi

2006

Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A modal method combined with system condensation is presented for the assessment of selection optimality and solution accuracy in inverse problems of structural optimization and damage detection. Finite element procedures are applied to seek the structural modifications for the characteristic changes assigned from design goals or dynamic measurements. The solution convergence is related to the selection of degrees of freedom and the method of system transformation. The application of the dynamic stiffness matrix yields a frequency-dependent transformation matrix, which can be expanded into an infinite series to obtain lower-order approximations. The modal matrix may be used to project the measured data onto the mode shapes, in which case much emphasis is laid on the linear independence of the selected degrees of freedom and the condition number of the transformation matrix. The baseline structure is used to obtain an initial perturbation, which can be improved through repeated updates of the transformation. The proposed methods give excellent solutions for frequency optimization. In damage detection, however, moderate deviations from the correct structural changes are attributable to system reduction. The dynamic stiffness matrix seems recommendable over the modal matrix projection for the system transformation.

show abstract

Sensor placement methodologies for dynamic testing

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Shear Deformation Correction to Transverse Shape Reconstruction From Distributed Strain Measurements

Shear Deformation Correction to Transverse Shape Reconstruction From Distributed Strain Measurements

The state of the art of sensor placement methods in structural health monitoring

System condensations for inverse problems of linear dynamic structures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About