Comparative Study on Design of Experiment in Frequency-Based Response Surface Methodology for Damage Detection

Abstract:

This paper investigates the performance of design of experiment (DOE) in response surface methodology (RSM) for vibration-based damage detection. The ability of three major types of DOE, namely central composite design (CCD), Box-Behnken (BBD) and D-optimal (Dopt) for damage detection based on modal frequency are investigated and compared. A procedure comprising three main stages—sampling, response surface (RS) modelling and model updating—are employed for damage localisation and quantification. By considering Young’s modulus and modal frequency as respective input and output, a set of samples is generated from each DOE. Full quadratic functions are considered in RS modelling while model updating is performed for damage detection. The performances of DOE are compared based on damage detectability. A numerical simply supported beam is used as case study by considering several single damage cases. The results show that CCD provides better prediction compared to other DOEs.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 735)
• Pages: 168-173
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.735.168
• Online since: February 2015
• Authors: Sarehati Umar*, Norhisham Bakhary, Airil Yasreen Mohd Yassin
• Keywords: Damage Detection, Design of Experiment (DOE), Modal Frequency, Model Updating, Response Surface Methodology (RSM)

References

[1] R. Perera, S. -E. Fang , C. Huerta, Structural crack detection without updated baseline model by single and multiobjective optimization, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 23 (2009) 752-768.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2008.06.010

[2] R. H. Myers , C. M. Anderson-Cook, Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, (2009).

[3] T. W. Simpson, J. Poplinski, P. N. Koch , J. K. Allen, Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: Survey and recommendations, Engineering with computers 17 (2001) 129-150.

DOI: 10.1007/pl00007198

[4] L. Alvarez, Design optimization based on genetic programming, University of Bradford, UK, Ph.D. Thesis, (2000).

[5] W. -X. Ren , H. -B. Chen, Finite element model updating in structural dynamics by using the response surface method, Engineering structures 32 (2010) 2455-2465.

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.04.019

[6] J. P. Han , Y. P. Luo, Static and dynamic finite element model updating of a rigid frame-continuous girders bridge based on response surface method, Advanced Materials Research 639 (2013) 992-997.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.639-640.992

[7] S. -E. Fang , R. Perera, A response surface methodology based damage identification technique, Smart Materials and Structures 18 (2009) 065009.

DOI: 10.1088/0964-1726/18/6/065009

[8] S. -E. Fang , R. Perera, Damage identification by response surface based model updating using d-optimal design, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 25 (2011) 717-733.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2010.07.007

[9] A. L. Cundy, Use of response surface metamodels in damage identification of dynamic structures, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Ph.D. Thesis, (2003).

DOI: 10.2172/812182

[10] O. S. Salawu, Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: A review, Engineering structures 19 (1997) 718-723.

DOI: 10.1016/s0141-0296(96)00149-6