Using the Detection and Relative Damage Quantification Indicator (DRQ) with Transmissibility

Abstract:

The Detection and Relative Damage Quantification Indicator (DRQ) was presented previously as a reliable damage detection indicator when used with Operational Deflection Shapes (ODS). The DRQ was computed from the Response Vector Assurance Criterion (RVAC) between the damaged and the initial ODS and the resulting value proved to be a good indicator of the presence of damage. The use of the ODS implies that the loads applied to the structure with and without damage are either known or, at least, the same. If the forces are not deterministic but still ergodic, the power spectrum could be used to evaluate the ODS, but still the above conditions hold, in a statistical sense. When a structure is subjected to ambient excitation, those conditions can hardly be assured. The loads may vary quite significantly and the ODS changes may be due to those changes instead of the presence of damage. To avoid this handicap, the authors explore here the use of the Transmissibility functions. If properly defined, the Transmissibility is invariant with respect to the amplitude of the loads. Since the Displacement Transmissibility is load invariant, a picked set of responses can be measured in service and used to predict another set; the result will then be correlated to the actual values using the RVAC and the DRQ will be computed. Numerical and experimental examples illustrate the proposed technique.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 347)
• Pages: 455-460
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.347.455
• Online since: September 2007
• Authors: N.M.M. Maia, A.M.R. Ribeiro, M. Fontul, D. Montalvão, R.P.C. Sampaio
• Keywords: Damage Detection, DRQ, RVAC, Transmissibility

References

[1] D. Montalvão, N. M. M. Maia and A. M. R. Ribeiro: The Shock and Vibration Digest, 38(4), 2006, p.295.

[2] S. W. Doebling, C. F. Farrar, M. B. Prime and D. W. Shevits: Damage Identification and Health Monitoring of Structural and Mechanical Systems from Changes in their Vibration Characteristics: A Literature Review, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA, (1996).

DOI: 10.2172/249299

[3] S. W. Doebling, C. F. Farrar and M. B. Prime: The Shock and Vibration Digest, 30(2), 1998, p.91.

[4] H. Sohn, C. F. Farrar, F. M. Hemez, D. D. Shunk, D. W. Stinemates B. R. and Nadler: A Review of Structural Health Monitoring Literature: 1996-2001, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA, (2003).

[5] R. P. C. Sampaio, N. M. M. Maia, J. M. M. Silva and E. A. M. Almas: Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(3), 2003, p.489.

[6] R.P.C. Sampaio, N.M.M. Maia and J.M.M. Silva: Damage Assessment of Structures (DAMAS), Southampton, U.K., 2003, p.69.

[7] R.P.C. Sampaio and N.M.M. Maia: 2nd European Workshop on SHM, München, Germany, 2004, p.757.

[8] W. Heylen, S. Lammens and P. Sas: Modal Analysis Theory and Testing, K. U. Leuven - PMA, Belgium, 1998, section A. 6.

[9] R. Pascual, J. -C. Golinval and M. Razeto: IMAC XV, Orlando, USA, 1997, p.587.

[10] R. Pascual, J. -C. Golinval and M. Razeto: IMAC XVII, Kissimmee, USA, 1999, p.238.

[11] D. Fotsch and D. J. Ewins: IMAC XVIII, San Antonio, USA, 2000, p.1225.

[12] M. Fontul, A. M. R. Ribeiro, N. M. M. Maia and J. M. M. Silva: Shock & Vibration, 11(5-6), 2004, p.563.

[13] N. M. M. Maia J. M. M. Silva and A. M. R. Ribeiro: IMAC XVII, Orlando, U.S. A, 1999, p.1126.