In this work, a computational framework is proposed for fatigue damage estimation in structural systems by integrating operational experimental measurements in a high-fidelity, large-scale finite element model. The proposed method is applied in a linear steel substructure of a lignite grinder assembly at a Public Power Corporation power plant. A finite element model of the steel base is developed and updated to match the dynamic characteristics measured in real operating conditions. This is achieved through coupled use of numerical and experimental methods for identifying, updating, and optimizing a high-fidelity finite element model. The full stress time histories of the complex mechanical assembly are estimated, at critical locations, by imposing operational vibration measurements from a limited number of sensors in the updated finite element model. Fatigue damage and remaining lifetime is subsequently estimated via commonly adopted engineering approaches, such as Palmgren–Miner damage rule, S–N curves, and rainflow cycle counting. Incorporation of a numerical model of the structure in the response estimation procedure permits stress estimation at unmeasured locations, thereby enabling the drawing of a complete and substantially dense fatigue map consistent with the vibration measurements. Fatigue predictions via the proposed framework are highly correlated to experimental fatigue results, proving the efficiency and applicability of the framework.
WangWQIsmailFFarid GolnaraghiM.Assessment of gear damage monitoring techniques using vibration measurements. Mech Syst Signal Pr2001; 15(5): 905–922.
2.
FritzenCPJenneweinDKieferT.Damage detection based on model updating methods. Mech Syst Signal Pr1998; 12(1): 163–186.
3.
BarthorpeRJ.On model-and data-based approaches to structural health monitoring. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Sheffield, 2010.
4.
EbrahimianHAstrozaRConteJPet al. Nonlinear finite element model updating for damage identification of civil structures using batch Bayesian estimation. Mech Syst Signal Pr2017; 84(Part B): 194–222.
5.
PapadimitriouCFritzenCPKraemerPet al. Fatigue predictions in entire body of metallic structures from a limited number of vibration sensors using Kalman filtering. Struct Control Hlth2011; 18(5): 554–573.
6.
PalmgrenAG.Die Lebensdauer von Kugellagern (Life Length of Roller Bearings or Durability of Ball Bearings). Z Ver Dtsch Ing1924; 68(14): 339–341.
7.
MinerMA.Cumulative damage in fatigue. Appl Mech T1945; 12: 159–164.
8.
EwinsDJ.Modal testing: theory and practice. Somerset: Research Studies Press, 1984.
9.
GiagopoulosDNatsiavasS.Hybrid (numerical-experimental) modeling of complex structures with linear and nonlinear components. Nonlinear Dynam2007; 47(1): 193–217.
10.
GiagopoulosDNatsiavasS.Dynamic response and identification of critical points in the superstructure of a vehicle using a combination of numerical and experimental methods. Exp Mech2015; 55(3): 529–542.
11.
MohantyPRixenDJ.Identifying mode shapes and modal frequencies by operational modal analysis in the presence of harmonic excitation. Exp Mech2005; 45(3): 213–220.
12.
RichardsonMHFormentiDL. Global curve fitting of frequency response measurements using the rational fraction polynomial method. In: Third IMAC conference, Orlando, FL, January1985.
13.
SpottswoodSMAllemangRJ.On the investigation of some parameter identification and experimental modal filtering issues for nonlinear reduced order models. Exp Mech2007; 47(4): 511–521.
14.
BehmaneshIMoaveniBPapadimitriouC.Probabilistic damage identification of a designed 9-story building using modal data in the presence of modeling errors. Eng Struct2017; 131: 542–552.
15.
BehmaneshIMoaveniBLombaertGet al. Hierarchical Bayesian model updating for probabilistic damage identification. In: Conference proceedings of the society for experimental mechanics series, 2015. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-15224-0_6.
16.
Zapico-ValleJLAlonso-CamblorRGonzález-MartínezMPet al. A new method for finite element model updating in structural dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Pr2010; 24(7): 2137–2159.
17.
GiagopoulosDArailopoulosA. Parameter estimation of nonlinear large scale systems through stochastic methods and measurement of its dynamic response. In: 7th European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering, ECCOMAS congress 2016, Crete Island, Greece, 5–10 June 2016, pp. 6369–6382. Athens, Greece: National Technical University of Athens, pp. 6369–6382.
18.
ArailopoulosAGiagopoulosD. Finite element model updating techniques of complex assemblies with linear and nonlinear components. In: 34th IMAC, a conference and exposition on structural dynamics, 2016, Orlando, FL, 2016. New York: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-29754-5_29.
GiagopoulosDArailopoulosA. Finite element model updating of geometrically complex structure through measurement of its dynamic response. In: 1st ECCOMAS thematic conference on uncertainty quantification in computational sciences and engineering, UNCECOMP 2015, Crete Island, Greece, 25–27 May 2015, pp. 639–651. Athens, Greece: National Technical University of Athens.
21.
GiagopoulosDArailopoulosA. Parameter identification of complex structures using finite element model updating techniques. In: ASME 2015 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, IDETC/CIE 2015, Boston, MA, 2–5 August 2015, p. V008T13A028. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
22.
SanayeiMKhalooAGulMet al. Automated finite element model updating of a scale bridge model using measured static and modal test data. Eng Struct2015; 102: 66–79.
23.
SippleJDSanayeiM.Finite element model updating using frequency response functions and numerical sensitivities. Struct Control Hlth2014; 21(5): 784–802.
24.
PapadimitriouCArgyrisCPanetsosP.A computationally efficient Bayesian framework for structural health monitoring using physics-based models. Civil Comp Proceed2015; 109.
25.
PapadimitriouCNtotsiosEGiagopoulosDet al. Variability of updated finite element models and their predictions consistent with vibration measurements. Struct Control Hlth2012; 19(5): 630–654.
26.
YuenK-VBeckJLKatafygiotisLS.Efficient model updating and health monitoring methodology using incomplete modal data without mode matching. Struct Control Hlth2006; 13(1): 91–107.
27.
BeckJLKatafygiotisLS.Updating models and their uncertainties. I: Bayesian statistical framework. J Eng Mech1998; 124: 455–461.
28.
YuenKV.Bayesian methods for structural dynamics and civil engineering. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
MarshGWignallCThiesPRet al. Review and application of rainflow residue processing techniques for accurate fatigue damage estimation. Int J Fatigue2016; 82: 757–765.
31.
DowningSDSocieDF.Simple rainflow counting algorithms. Int J Fatigue1982; 4(1): 31–40.
32.
DertimanisVChatziEAzamSEet al. Output-only fatigue prediction of uncertain steel structures. In: 8th European workshop on structural health monitoring, EWSHM 2016, Spain, Bilbao, 5–8 July 2016.
33.
DertimanisVKChatziENEftekhar AzamSet al. Fatigue assessment in steel railway bridges using output only vibration measurements and partial structural information. Civil Comp Proceed2016; 110. DOI:10.4203/ccp.110.139.
34.
PapadiotiDCGiagopoulosDPapadimitriouC. Fatigue monitoring in metallic structures using vibration measurements. In: 32nd IMAC conference and exposition on structural dynamics, 2014, Orlando, FL, 1–5 July 2014, pp. 33–40. New York: Springer.
35.
PapadimitriouCLourensEMLombaertGet al. Prediction of fatigue damage accumulation in metallic structures by the estimation of strains from operational vibrations. In: Life-cycle and sustainability of civil infrastructure systems: proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on life-cycle civil engineering, IALCCE 2012, 2012. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/34634417.pdf
36.
PerrosKPapadimitriouCSobczykK (2008) Fatigue reliability predictions in vibrating structures under uncertainty. Proc. 4th European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring (eds UhlTOstachowiczWHolnicki-SzulcJ), DEStech Publications, Inc., pp. 491–498.
37.
HansenN.The CMA evolution strategy: a tutorial. Research Centre Saclay – ˆIle-de-France Université Paris-Saclay, LRI, 2011.
38.
HadjidoukasPEAngelikopoulosPPapadimitriouCet al. Π4U: a high performance computing framework for Bayesian uncertainty quantification of complex models. J Comput Phys2015; 284: 1–21.
39.
HansenN.The CMA evolution strategy a comparing review. Towards New Evol Comp2006; 192(1): 75–102.
40.
HansenNMüllerSDKoumoutsakosP.Reducing the time complexity of the derandomized evolution strategy with covariance matrix adaptation (CMA-ES). Evol Comput2003; 11(1): 1–18.
41.
HansenNOstermeirA.Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evol Comput2001; 9(2): 159–195.
42.
GiagopoulosDArailopoulosA.Computational framework for model updating of large scale linear and nonlinear finite element models using state of the art evolution strategy. Comput Struct2017; 192: 210–232.
43.
HadjidoukasPEAngelikopoulosPKulakovaLet al. Exploiting task-based parallelism in Bayesian uncertainty quantification. In TräffJHunoldSVersaciF (eds) Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics). Berlin: Springer, 2015, pp. 532–544.
44.
HadjidoukasPEAngelikopoulosPVoglisCet al. NDL-v2.0: a new version of the numerical differentiation library for parallel architectures. Comput Phys Commun2014; 185(7): 2217–2219.
45.
HadjidoukasPELappasEDimakopoulosVV. A runtime library for platform-independent task parallelism. In: 20th Euromicro international conference on parallel, distributed and network-based processing, Garching, 15–17 February 2012.
46.
BeckJL.Bayesian system identification based on probability logic. Struct Control Hlth2010; 17(7): 825–847.
47.
KatafygiotisLSBeckJL.Updating models and their uncertainties. II: model identifiability. J Eng Mech1998; 124(4): 463–467.
48.
PapadimitriouC.Bayesian uncertainty quantification and propagation in structural dynamics simulations. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on structural dynamics, EURODYN 2014, Porto, Portugal, 30 June–2 July 2014, pp. 111–123. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Thessaly.
49.
HanS.Measuring displacement signal with an accelerometer. J Mech Sci Technol2010; 24(6): 1329–1335.
50.
YangYJiangD-x. Numerical integration and complex trend term elimination of acceleration signal in fault diagnosis. In: International Power, Electronics and Materials Engineering Conference (IPEMEC 2015). 2015, pp. 501–506. Beijing, China: Gas Turbine Institute, Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University.
51.
LagariasJCReedsJAWrightMHet al. Convergence properties of the Nelder–Mead simplex method in low dimensions. SIAM J Optimiz1998; 9(1): 112–147.
52.
RichardsonLF.The approximate arithmetical solution by finite differences of physical problems involving differential equations, with an application to the stresses in a masonry dam. Philos T R Soc Lond1911; 210(459–470): 307–357.
53.
LynessJNMolerCB.Generalized Romberg methods for integrals of derivatives. Numer Math1969; 14(1): 1–13.
EN. Eurocode 3: design of steel structures: Part 1–9: Fatigue. Brussels: CEN, 2005.
57.
PalmgrenA.Die Lebensdauer von Kugallagern. VDI-Zeitschrift1924; 68(14): 339–341.
58.
MinerMA.Cumulative damage in fatigue. Appl Mech T1945; 12(3): 159–164.
59.
MachaELagodaTNieslonyAet al. Fatigue life under variable-amplitude loading according to the cycle-counting and spectral methods. Mater Sci2006; 42(3): 416–425.
60.
LagodaTMachaENieslonyA.Fatigue life calculation by means of the cycle counting and spectral methods under multiaxial random loading. Fatigue Fract Eng M2005; 28(4): 409–420.
61.
ASTM E1049-85. Standard practices for cycle counting in fatigue analysis. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, 1997.
62.
SutherlandHJMandellJF.Optimized constant-life diagram for the analysis of fiberglass composites used in wind turbine blades. J Sol Energ2005; 127(4): 563–569.
63.
TunnaJM.Fatigue life prediction for Gaussian random loads at the design stage. Fatigue Fract Eng M1986; 9(1): 169–184.
64.
NieslonyABöhmM.Mean stress effect correction using constant stress ratio S-N curves. Int J Fatigue2013; 52: 49–56.
ChingJChenCH.Transitional Markov chain Monte Carlo Method for Bayesian model updating, model class selection, and model averaging. J Eng Mech2007; 133(7): 816–832.
