Identifying damage of structural systems is typically characterized as an inverse problem which might be ill-conditioned due to aleatory and epistemic uncertainties induced by measurement noise and modeling error. Sparse representation can be used to perform inverse analysis for the case of sparse damage. In this article, we propose a novel two-stage sensitivity analysis–based framework for both model updating and sparse damage identification. Specifically, an Bayesian learning method is first developed for updating the intact model and uncertainty quantification so as to set forward a baseline for damage detection. A sparse representation pipeline built on a quasi- method, for example, sequential threshold least squares regression, is then presented for damage localization and quantification. In addition, Bayesian optimization together with cross-validation is developed to heuristically learn hyperparameters from data, which saves the computational cost of hyperparameter tuning and produces more reliable identification result. The proposed framework is verified by three examples, including a 10-story shear-type building, a complex truss structure, and a shake-table test of an eight-story steel frame. Results show that the proposed approach is capable of both localizing and quantifying structural damage with high accuracy.
MottersheadJELinkMFriswellMI. The sensitivity method in finite element model updating: a tutorial. Mech Syst Signal Process2011; 25: 2275–2296.
2.
XuBHeJRovekampR, et al. Structural parameters and dynamic loading identification from incomplete measurements: approach and validation. Mech Syst Signal Process2012; 28: 244–257.
3.
SunHLusHBettiR. Identification of structural models using a modified Artificial Bee Colony algorithm. Comput Struct2013; 116: 59–74.
4.
ChatziENSmythAW. The unscented Kalman filter and particle filter methods for nonlinear structural system identification with noncollocated heterogeneous sensing. Struct Control Health Monit2009; 16: 99–123.
5.
MarwalaT. Finite element model updating using computational intelligence techniques: applications to structural dynamics. Berlin: Springer, 2010.
HansenPC. Rank-deficient and discrete Ill-posed problems: numerical aspects of linear inversion. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM, 2005.
8.
BeckJLKatafygiotisLS. Updating models and their uncertainties. I: Bayesian statistical framework. J Eng Mech1998; 124: 455–461.
9.
ZhangFLAuSK. Fundamental two-stage formulation for Bayesian system identification, part II: application to ambient vibration data. Mech Syst Signal Process2016; 66: 43–61.
10.
BehmaneshIMoaveniBLombaertG, et al. Hierarchical Bayesian model updating for structural identification. Mech Syst Signal Pr2015; 64: 360–376.
11.
SunHFengDLiuY, et al. Statistical regularization for identification of structural parameters and external loadings using state space models. Comput Aided Civ Inf2015; 30: 843–858.
12.
SohnHLawKH. A Bayesian probabilistic approach for structure damage detection. Earthquake Engng Struct Dyn1997; 26: 1259–1281.
13.
YuenKVOrtizGA. Multiresolution Bayesian nonparametric general regression for structural model updating. Struct Control Health Monit2018; 25: e2077.
14.
MaoZToddMD. A Bayesian recursive framework for ball-bearing damage classification in rotating machinery. Struct Health Monit2016; 15: 668–684.
15.
YinTJiangQHYuenKV. Vibration-based damage detection for structural connections using incomplete modal data by Bayesian approach and model reduction technique. Eng Struct2017; 132: 260–277.
16.
MaoZToddMD. A Bayesian damage prognosis approach applied to bearing failure. In: The 32nd IMAC, a conference and exposition on structural dynamics (ed KerschenG), Model validation and uncertainty quantification, vol. 3, Brescia, 1–5 July 2012, pp. 237–242. Cham: Springer.
17.
ChingJYBeckJL. Bayesian analysis of the phase II IASC–ASCE structural health monitoring experimental benchmark data. J Eng Mech2004; 130: 1233–1244.
18.
SimoenEMoaveniBConteJP, et al. Uncertainty quantification in the assessment of progressive damage in a 7-story full-scale building slice. J Eng Mech2013; 139: 1818–1830.
19.
AuSKZhangFL. Fundamental two-stage formulation for Bayesian system identification, part I: general theory. Mech Syst Signal Process2016; 66: 31–42.
20.
YuenKV. Bayesian methods for structural dynamics and civil engineering. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
21.
SimoenEDe RoeckGLombaertG. Dealing with uncertainty in model updating for damage assessment: a review. Mech Syst Signal Process2015; 56: 123–149.
22.
HuangYShaoCWuB, et al. State-of-the-art review on Bayesian inference in structural system identification and damage assessment. Adv Struct Eng2019; 22: 1329–1351.
23.
HuangYBeckJL. Hierarchical sparse Bayesian learning for structural health monitoring with incomplete modal data. Int J Uncertain Quan2015; 5: 139–169.
24.
HuangYBeckJLLiH. Hierarchical sparse Bayesian learning for structural damage detection: theory, computation and application. Struct Saf2017; 64: 37–53.
25.
HuangYBeckJLLiH. Bayesian system identification based on hierarchical sparse Bayesian learning and Gibbs sampling with application to structural damage assessment. Comput Method Appl M2017; 318: 382–411.
26.
CandesEJTaoT. Decoding by linear programming. IEEE T Inform Theory2005; 51: 4203–4215.
27.
RudySHBruntonSLProctorJL, et al. Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations. Sci Adv2017; 3(4): e1602614.
28.
FoxRLKapoorMP. Rates of change of eigenvalues and eigenvectors. AIAA J1968; 6: 2426–2429.
29.
SunHBüyüköztürkO. Identification of traffic-induced nodal excitations of truss bridges through heterogeneous data fusion. Smart Mater Struct2015; 24: 075032.
30.
ChenZZhangRZhengJ, et al. Sparse Bayesian learning for structural damage identification. Mech Syst Signal Process2020; 140: 106689.
31.
YanGSunHBüyüköztürkO. Impact load identification for composite structures using Bayesian regularization and unscented Kalman filter. Struct Control Health Monit2017; 24(5): e1910.
32.
YanGSunH. A non-negative Bayesian learning method for impact force reconstruction. J Sound Vib2017; 457: 354–367.
33.
SunHBettiR. A hybrid optimization algorithm with Bayesian inference for probabilistic model updating. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng2015; 30: 602–619.
34.
BishopCM. Pattern recognition and machine learning. Berlin: Springer, 2006.
35.
RosenblattM. A central limit theorem and a strong mixing condition. PNAS1956; 42: 43.
36.
ZhangLSchaefferH. On the convergence of the SINDy algorithm. Multiscale Model Sim2019; 17: 948–972.
37.
SnoekJLarochelleHAdamsRP. Practical Bayesian optimization of machine learning algorithms. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst2012; 25: 2951–2959.
38.
RasmussenCE. Gaussian processes in machine learning. In: BousquetOVon LuxburgURätschG (eds) Advanced lectures on machine learning (Summer School on Machine Learning). Berlin: Springer, 2003, pp. 63–71.
39.
TibshiraniR. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Series B1996; 58: 267–288.
40.
MooreH. MATLAB for engineers. London: Pearson, 2017.
41.
YuenKVBeckJLKatafygiotisLS. Efficient model updating and health monitoring methodology using incomplete modal data without mode matching. Struct Control Health Monit2006; 13: 91–107.
42.
JuangJNPhanMHortaLG, et al. Identification of observer Kalman filter Markov parameters —theory and experiments. J Guid Control Dynam1993; 16: 320–329.
43.
JuangJNPappaRS. An eigensystem realization algorithm for modal parameter identification and model reduction. J Guid Control Dynam1985; 8: 620–627.
44.
LusHBettiRLongmanRW. Identification of linear structural systems using earthquake induced vibration data. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn1999; 28: 1449–1467.
45.
LiXYLawSS. Adaptive Tikhonov regularization for damage detection based on nonlinear model updating. Mech Syst Signal Process2010; 24: 1646–1664.
46.
MarquardtDWSneeRD. Ridge regression in practice. Am Stat1975; 29: 3–20.
47.
SunHBüyüköztürkO. Probabilistic updating of building models using incomplete modal data. Multiscale Model Sim2019; 17: 948–972.
48.
YuLCLinTK. Application of bio-informatics based technology on structural health monitoring. Technical Report NCREE-10-005. Taipei, Taiwan: National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering, 2010.
49.
SunHMordretAPrietoGA, et al. Bayesian characterization of buildings using seismic interferometry on ambient vibrations. Mech Syst Sig Process2017; 85: 468–486.
50.
SunHBüyüköztürkO. The MIT Green Building benchmark problem for structural health monitoring of tall buildings. Struct Control Health Monit2018; 25(3): e2115.
