Abstract

Signal Processing is, arguably, the fundamental enabling technology for vibration-based Structural Health Monitoring (SHM), which includes damage detection and more advanced tasks. However, the investigation of real-life vibration measurements is quite compelling. For a better understanding of its dynamic behaviour, a multi-degree-of-freedom system should be efficiently decomposed into its independent components. However, the target structure may be affected by (damage-related or not) nonlinearities, which appear as noise-like distortions in its vibrational response. This response can be nonstationary as well and thus requires a time-frequency analysis. Adaptive mode decomposition methods are the most apt strategy under these circumstances. Here, a shortlist of three well-established algorithms has been selected for an in-depth analysis. These signal decomposition approaches—namely, the Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD), the Hilbert Vibration Decomposition (HVD), and the Variational Mode Decomposition (VMD)—are deemed to be the most representative ones because of their extensive use and favourable reception from the research community. The main aspects and properties of these data-adaptive methods, as well as their advantages, limitations, and drawbacks, are discussed and compared. Then, the potentialities of the three algorithms are assessed firstly on a numerical case study and then on a well-known experimental benchmark, including nonlinear cases and nonstationary signals.

Highlights

  • Variational Mode Decomposition (VMD) and Hilbert Vibration Decomposition (HVD) share the same requisites for band-limited IMFs, which are slightly different from the original IMF definition adopted for the Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD)

  • Ref. [55] highlighted a larger accuracy of support-vector machines (SVM) classifiers trained on VMD-extracted BLIMFs in comparison to the ones trained with other signal components

  • The HVD and VMD algorithms were set to return only the first IMF; in both cases, this mode was basically corresponding to the first natural frequency

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. With a proper comparison between the current situation and the known “normal” baseline model of the system, vibration-based damage detection and Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) can be performed In this sense, the purpose of any decomposition technique is to isolate and extrapolate a Defect Signal Mode (DSM) from the wide-band recordings of the structural response. Other review papers perform some limited testing, generally applying the algorithms on one or few (often synthetic) signals, and with minimal commentary The purpose of this direct comparison is to address the accuracy and efficiency of such methods for the extraction of DSFs and the subsequent Machine Learning training.

Theoretical Background
The Hilbert Transform
Qualitative Comparison of the Techniques
The Numerical and Experimental Case Studies
The Numerical Dataset
The LANL Benchmark
Results
Preliminary Results for Noise Sensitivity and Sensor Placement
Computational Time Required
CEEMDAN IMFs
HVD IMFs
VMD IMFs
Comparability of the Extracted Modes
Sensitivity of the Extracted IMFs to Damage
Uses for ML-Based SHM
Discussion and Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call