The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparative study of damage identification algorithms applied to a bridge: I. Experiment
Abstract
Over the past 30 years detecting damage in a structure from changes in global dynamic parameters has received considerable attention from the civil, aerospace and mechanical engineering communities. The basis for this approach to damage detection is that changes in the structure's physical properties (i.e., boundary conditions, stiffness, mass and/or damping) will, in turn, alter the dynamic characteristics (i.e., resonant frequencies, modal damping and mode shapes) of the structure. Changes in properties such as the flexibility or stiffness matrices derived from measured modal properties and changes in mode shape curvature have shown promise for locating structural damage. However, to date there has not been a study reported in the technical literature that directly compares these various methods. The experimental results reported in this paper and the results of a numerical study reported in an accompanying paper attempt to fill this void in the study of damage detection methods. Five methods for damage assessment that have been reported in the technical literature are summarized and compared using experimental modal data from an undamaged and damaged bridge. For the most severe damage case investigated, all methods can accurately locate the damage. The methods show varying levels of success when applied to less severe damage cases. This paper concludes by summarizing some areas of the damage identification process that require further study.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cited by
Damage identification in beam-type structures: frequency-based method vs mode-shape-based method
Kim, J.-T., Ryu, Y.-S., Cho, H.-M., & Stubbs, N. (2003) · Engineering Structures · doi:10.1016/s0141-0296(02)00118-9 · Cited by 667
Structural health monitoring: Closing the gap between research and industrial deployment
Cawley, P. (2018) · Structural Health Monitoring · doi:10.1177/1475921717750047 · Cited by 423
Damage detection by mode shape squares extracted from a passing vehicle
Zhang, Y., Wang, L., & Xiang, Z. (2012) · Journal of Sound and Vibration · doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2011.09.004 · Cited by 219
Structural damage identification using damping: a compendium of uses and features
Cao, M. S., Sha, G. G., Gao, Y. F., & Ostachowicz, W. (2017) · Smart Materials and Structures · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/aa550a · Cited by 196
Zhou, H. F., Ni, Y. Q., & Ko, J. M. (2010) · Engineering Structures · doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.02.026 · Cited by 102
Metadata
- Authors
- Farrar, C. R., & Jauregui, D. A.
- Venue
- Smart Materials and Structures
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 1998-10-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 704-719
- ISSN
- 0964-1726 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-665X
- OpenAlex
- W2072310961
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative study of damage identification algorithms applied to a bridge: I. Experiment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0964-1726/7/5/013
- The paper
- Farrar, C. R., & Jauregui, D. A. (1998). Comparative study of damage identification algorithms applied to a bridge: I. Experiment. Smart Materials and Structures. https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/7/5/013
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.