Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 27

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Model order determination and noise removal for modal parameter estimation

James Hu, Sau-Lon, Bao, Xingxian, Li, Huajun·2010·Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

Abstract

Given a noisy impulsive response function (IRF) that has been contributed by an unknown number of modes, this article proposes a different approach from the traditional methods for estimating modal parameters from this noisy IRF. The major difference lies in the way of handling noise and choosing the computational model order. Whereas the traditional approach accommodates noise by purposely increasing the computational model order, the proposed approach uses the actual system order as the computational model order and rejects noise prior to performing the modal parameter estimation. The proposed approach includes three steps: (1) model order (or number of modes) determination from the measured IRF—by finding the rank of a Hankel matrix constructed from the measured IRF, (2) noise removal from the measured IRF to obtain a filtered IRF—by implementing Cadzow's algorithm for the structured low rank approximation (SLRA) on the Hankel matrix, and (3) modal parameters estimation from the filtered IRF—by using the complex exponential method (Prony's method). Numerical studies include both synthesized and experimental data. While measured IRFs with mild and strong noise levels are simulated for a 5 degree-of-freedom mass-spring-dashpot system, the modal parameter estimations based on the filtered IRFs are very good for both noise levels. While experimental data are measured from two accelerometers mounted at a cantilever beam, the modal parameters estimated from the filtered IRFs of the two accelerometers are in excellent agreement.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ymssp.2010.01.005

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Allemang, 1998, A unified matrix polynomial approach to modal identification, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 211, 301, 10.1006/jsvi.1997.1321 · doi:10.1006/jsvi.1997.1321
  2. Braun, 1987, Determination of structural modes via the Prony method: system order and noise induced poles, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 81, 1447, 10.1121/1.394497 · doi:10.1121/1.394497
  3. Braun, 1987, Time and frequency identification methods in over-determined systems, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 1, 245, 10.1016/0888-3270(87)90102-6 · doi:10.1016/0888-3270(87)90102-6
  4. Braun, 1987, Structural parameter identification in the frequency domain: the use of over-determined systems, ASME Transactions, Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, 109, 120, 10.1115/1.3143827 · doi:10.1115/1.3143827
  5. Sanliturk, 2005, Noise elimination from measured frequency response functions, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 19, 615, 10.1016/j.ymssp.2004.04.005 · doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2004.04.005
  6. Chu, 2003, Structured low rank approximation, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 366, 157, 10.1016/S0024-3795(02)00505-0 · doi:10.1016/s0024-3795(02)00505-0
  7. De Moor, 1994, Total least squares for affinely structured matrices and the noisy realization problem, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 42, 3104, 10.1109/78.330370 · doi:10.1109/78.330370
  8. Markovsky, 2007, Overview of total least squares methods, Signal Processing, 87, 2283, 10.1016/j.sigpro.2007.04.004 · DOI
  9. De Moor, 1993, Structured total least squares and L2 approximation problems, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 188–189, 163, 10.1016/0024-3795(93)90468-4 · doi:10.1016/0024-3795(93)90468-4
  10. Rosen, 1996, Total least norm formulation and solution of structured problems, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 17, 110, 10.1137/S0895479893258802 · doi:10.1137/s0895479893258802
  11. Park, 1999, Low rank approximation of a Hankel matrix by structured total least norm, Bit Numerical Mathematics, 39, 757, 10.1023/A:1022347425533 · doi:10.1023/a:1022347425533
  12. Schuermans, 2006, Block-row Hankel weighted low rank approximation, Numerical Linear Algebra with Applications, 13, 293, 10.1002/nla.459 · doi:10.1002/nla.459
  13. Markovsky, 2008, Structured low-rank approximation and its applications, Automatica, 44, 891, 10.1016/j.automatica.2007.09.011 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Cadzow, 1988, Signal enhancement—a composite property mapping algorithm, IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 36, 49, 10.1109/29.1488 · DOI
  15. Weiss, 1963, Prony's method, Z-transforms, and pade approximation, SIAM Review, 5, 145, 10.1137/1005035 · doi:10.1137/1005035
  16. Eckart, 1936, The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank, Psychometrika, 1, 211, 10.1007/BF02288367 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Tufts, 1993, Estimation of a signal waveform from noisy data using low-rank approximation to a data matrix, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 41, 1716, 10.1109/78.212753 · DOI
  18. B. Peeters, System identification and damage detection in civil engineering, Ph.D. thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 2000.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
James Hu, S.-L., Bao, X., & Li, H.
Venue
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
1605-1620
ISSN
0888-3270
Cited by
27
References
0
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.