Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

邮发代号 80-968

2019 Impact Factor: 1.68

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering  2021, Vol. 15 Issue (4): 851-866   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-021-0739-3
  本期目录
Damage identification in connections of moment frames using time domain responses and an optimization method
Narges PAHNABI, Seyed Mohammad SEYEDPOOR()
Department of Civil Engineering, Shomal University, Amol 4616184596, Iran
 全文: PDF(9367 KB)   HTML
Abstract

Damage is defined as changes to the material and/or geometric properties of a structural system, comprising changes to the boundary conditions and system connectivity, adversely affecting the system’s performance. Inspecting the elements of structures, particularly critical components, is vital to evaluate the structural lifespan and safety. In this study, an optimization-based method for joint damage identification of moment frames using the time-domain responses is introduced. The beam-to-column connection in a metallic moment frame structure is modeled by a zero-length rotational spring at both ends of the beam element. For each connection, an end-fixity factor is specified, which changes between 0 and 1. Then, the problem of joint damage identification is converted to a standard optimization problem. An objective function is defined using the nodal point accelerations extracted from the damaged structure and an analytical model of the structure in which the nodal accelerations are obtained using the Newmark procedure. The optimization problem is solved by an improved differential evolution algorithm (IDEA) for identifying the location and severity of the damage. To assess the capability of the proposed method, two numerical examples via different damage scenarios are considered. Then, a comparison between the proposed method and the existing damage identification method is provided. The outcomes reveal the high efficiency of the proposed method for finding the severity and location of joint damage considering noise effects.

Key wordsdamage identification    beam-to-column connection    time-domain response    optimization
收稿日期: 2020-12-21      出版日期: 2021-09-29
Corresponding Author(s): Seyed Mohammad SEYEDPOOR   
 引用本文:   
. [J]. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2021, 15(4): 851-866.
Narges PAHNABI, Seyed Mohammad SEYEDPOOR. Damage identification in connections of moment frames using time domain responses and an optimization method. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(4): 851-866.
 链接本文:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/CN/10.1007/s11709-021-0739-3
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/CN/Y2021/V15/I4/851
Fig.1  
Fig.2  
Fig.3  
Fig.4  
element A (m 2) I (m 4) E (GPa) ρ (kg/m 3)
beam and column 1.8 × 10 −4 5.4 × 10 −10 70 2700
Tab.1  
damage cases element number, end joint number
G1 (21,1) = 0.5
G2 (21,1) = 0.35, (25,2) = 0.35
Tab.2  
Fig.5  
case number joint number
case 1 6
case 2 11
case 3 22
case 4 28
case 5 6, 11
case 6 11, 22
case 7 17, 22
Tab.3  
Fig.6  
Fig.7  
Fig.8  
Fig.9  
element A (m 2) I (m 4) E (GPa) ρ (kg/m 3)
beam 1.04 × 10 −2 5.62 × 10 −4 210 7850
column 2.78 × 10 −2 7.12 × 10 −4 210 7850
Tab.4  
damage cases (element number, end joint number)
G1 (16,2) = 0.45
G2 (3,1) = 0.3, (3,2) = 0.15, (11,1) = 0.2
G3 (8,2) = 0.25, (17,2) = 0.35, (24,1) = 0.35
Tab.5  
Fig.10  
case number joint number
case 1 3
case 2 18
case 3 14
case 4 8, 13
case 5 9, 10
case 6 14, 15
case 7 7, 18
case 8 10, 3, 2
case 9 10, 14, 15
case 10 3, 17, 18
Tab.6  
Fig.11  
Fig.12  
Fig.13  
Fig.14  
Fig.15  
damage case damaged elements (element number, end joint number) identified damage
the proposed method Ref. [ 13]
no noise 5% noise 10% noise no noise 5% noise 10% noise
G1 (21,1) = 0.5 0.5 0.508 0.515 0.507 0.531 0.541
(25,2) = 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.034 0.076
(26,1) = 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.009 0.021 0.016 0.110
(30,2) = 0.0 0.0 0.027 0.019 0.009 0.010 0.010
CE* 0.0 0.070 0.086 0.100 0.182 0.474
G2 (21,1) = 0.35 0.35 0.361 0.361 0.352 0.375 0.383
(25,2) = 0.35 0.35 0.366 0.364 0.352 0.391 0.411
(26,1) = 0.0 0.0 0.006 0.011 0.000 0.016 0.011
(30,2) = 0.0 0.0 0.021 0.005 0.000 0.015 0.003
CE* 0.0 0.077 0.059 0.006 0.138 0.154
Tab.7  
1 S M Seyedpoor, O Yazdanpanah. An efficient indicator for structural damage localization using the change of strain energy based on static noisy data. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2014, 38( 9−10): 2661– 2672
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.10.072
2 S S Nanthakumar, T Lahmer, X Zhuang, G Zi, T Rabczuk. Detection of material interfaces using a regularized level set method in piezoelectric structures. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2016, 24( 1): 153– 176
https://doi.org/10.1080/17415977.2015.1017485
3 C B Yun, J H Yi, E Y Bahng. Joint damage assessment of framed structures using a neural networks technique. Engineering Structures, 2001, 23( 5): 425– 435
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00067-5
4 S Ritdumrongkul, Y Fujino. Identification of the location and level of damage in multiple-bolted-joint structures by PZT actuator-sensors. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2006, 132( 2): 304– 311
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:2(304)
5 M Dilena, A Morassi. Vibrations of steel-concrete composite beams with partially degraded connection and applications to damage detection. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2009, 320( 1−2): 101– 124
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2008.07.022
6 Xu B, Tan T, Hao H. Local shear connectors damage detection for a concrete-steel composite beam using acceleration time series. In: Proceedings of the 12th Biennial International Conference on Engineering, Construction, and Operations in Challenging Environments. Honolulu: ASCE, 2010
7 Labuz E L, Chang M, Pakzad S N. Local damage detection in beam-column connections using a dense sensor network. In: Proceedings of Structures Congress 2010. Orlando: ASCE, 2010
8 He K, Zhu W D. Structural damage detection using changes in natural frequencies: Theory and applications. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Damage Assessment of Structures (DAMAS 2011). Oxford: IOP Publishing Ltd, 2011
9 Hegenderfer J, Atamturktur S, Gillen A. Damage detection in steel structures using bayesian calibration techniques. In: Conference Proceedings of the Society for Expeimental Mechanics Series. New York: Springer, 2012
10 J N Yang, Y Xia, C H Loh. Damage identification of bolt connections in a steel frame. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2013, 140 : 1– 9
11 U Dackermann, J Li, B Samali. Identification of member connectivity and mass changes on a two-storey framed structure using frequency response functions and artificial neural networks. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2013, 332( 16): 3636– 3653
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2013.02.018
12 D D Ho, T M Ngo, J T Kim. Impedance-based damage monitoring of steel column connection: Numerical simulation. Structural Monitoring and Maintenance, 2014, 1( 3): 339– 356
https://doi.org/10.12989/smm.2014.1.3.339
13 B Nanda, D Maity, D K Maiti. Modal parameter based inverse approach for structural joint damage assessment using unified particle swarm optimization. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2014, 242 : 407– 422
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2014.05.115
14 T Yin, Q H Jiang, K V Yuen. Vibration-based damage detection for structural connections using incomplete modal data by Bayesian approach and model reduction technique. Engineering Structures, 2017, 132 : 260– 277
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.035
15 D Dinh-Cong, V Ho-Huu, T Vo-Duy, H Q Ngo-Thi, T Nguyen-Thoi. Efficiency of Jaya algorithm for solving the optimization-based structural damage identification problem based on a hybrid objective function. Engineering Optimization, 2018, 50( 8): 1233– 1251
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305215X.2017.1367392
16 D Dinh-Cong, H Dang-Trung, T Nguyen-Thoi. An efficient approach for optimal sensor placement and damage identification in laminated composite structures. Advances in Engineering Software, 2018, 119 : 48– 59
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2018.02.005
17 D Dinh-Cong, T Nguyen-Thoi, D T Nguyen. A FE model updating technique based on SAP2000-OAPI and enhanced SOS algorithm for damage assessment of full-scale structures. Applied Soft Computing, 2020, 89 : 106100–
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106100
18 H N Katkhuda, H M Dwairi, N Shatarat. System identification of steel framed structures with semi-rigid connections. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 2010, 34( 3): 351– 366
https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2010.34.3.351
19 M S Filho, M J R Guimaraes, C L Sahlit, J L V Brito. Wind pressures in framed structures with semi-rigid connections. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 2004, 26 : 180– 189
20 Clough R W, Penzien J. Dynamics of Structures. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993
21 Z Song, C Su. Computation of Rayleigh damping coefficient for the seismic analysis of a hydro-powerhouse. Shock and Vibration, 2017, 2 : 1– 11
22 Standard No. 2800. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. Tehran: Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center, 2015
23 Manie J, Kikstra W P. DIANA Finite Element Analysis User’s Manual Release 10.0, 2015
24 S M Seyedpoor, S Shahbandeh, O Yazdanpanah. An efficient method for structural damage detection using a differential evolution algorithm-based optimization approach. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 2015, 32( 3): 230– 250
https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2015.1046051
25 S M Seyedpoor, M Montazer. A damage identification method for truss structures using a flexibility-based damage probability index and differential evolution algorithm. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2016, 24( 8): 1303– 1322
https://doi.org/10.1080/17415977.2015.1101761
26 S M Seyedpoor, M Montazer. A two stage damage detection method for truss structures using a modal residual vector based indicator and differential evolution algorithm. Smart Structures and Systems, 2016, 17( 2): 347– 361
https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2016.17.2.347
27 R Storn, K Price. Differential evolution-a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. Journal of Global Optimization, 1997, 11( 4): 341– 359
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328
28 L T Stutz, R A Tenenbaum, R A P Correa. The differential evolution method applied to continuum damage identification via flexibility matrix. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2015, 345 : 86– 102
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2015.01.049
29 M Nobahari, S M Seyedpoor. Structural damage detection using an efficient correlation-based index and a modified genetic algorithm. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 2011, 53( 9−10): 1798– 1809
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.12.058
30 S Das, S S Mullick, P N Suganthan. Recent advances in differential evolution-an updated survey. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 2016, 27 : 1– 30
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2016.01.004
31 C Erbao, L Mingyong. A hybrid differential evolution algorithm to vehicle routing problem with fuzzy demands. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 2009, 231( 1): 302– 310
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2009.02.015
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed