The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Summary Review of Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks for Structural Health Monitoring
Abstract
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the adoption of emerging sensing technologies for instrumentation within a variety of structural systems. Wireless sensors and sensor networks are emerging as sensing paradigms that the structural engineering field has begun to consider as substitutes for traditional tethered monitoring systems. A benefit of wireless structural monitoring systems is that they are inexpensive to install because extensive wiring is no longer required between sensors and the data acquisition system. Researchers are discovering that wireless sensors are an exciting technology that should not be viewed as simply a substitute for traditional tethered monitoring systems. Rather, wireless sensors can play greater roles in the processing of structural response data; this feature can be utilized to screen data for signs of structural damage. Also, wireless sensors have limitations that require novel system architectures and modes of operation. This paper is intended to serve as a summary review of the collective experience the structural engineering community has gained from the use of wireless sensors and sensor networks for monitoring structural performance and health.
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
Cites
Los Alamos National Lab., N. (. S., Doebling, S., USDOE, W., Farrar, C., Prime, M., & Shevitz, D. (1996) · doi:10.2172/249299 · Cited by 2,899 · cited 1×
“While many researchers have proposed the use of modal frequencies as a primary damage indicator, the method lacks sensitivity in structures where environmental factors also contribute to modal frequency shifts (Doebling et al., 1996).”
Background
Cited by
Na, W. S., & Baek, J. (2018) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s18051307 · Cited by 336
Martinez-Luengo, M., Kolios, A., & Wang, L. (2016) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.085 · Cited by 310
Safety and Security in Cyber-Physical Systems and Internet-of-Things Systems
Wolf, M., & Serpanos, D. (2018) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2017.2781198 · Cited by 250
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
Smart Infrastructure: A Vision for the Role of the Civil Engineering Profession in Smart Cities
Berglund, E. Z., Monroe, J. G., Ahmed, I., Noghabaei, M., Do, J., Pesantez, J. E., Khaksar Fasaee, M. A., Bardaka, E., Han, K., Proestos, G. T., et al. (2020) · Journal of Infrastructure Systems · doi:10.1061/(asce)is.1943-555x.0000549 · Cited by 185
Metadata
- Authors
- Lynch, J. P.
- Venue
- The Shock and Vibration Digest
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-03-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 91-128
- ISSN
- 0583-1024 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2050248078
- Cited by
- 1,533
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 213.03
- 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: A Summary Review of Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks for Structural Health Monitoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0583102406061499
- The paper
- Lynch, J. P. (2006). A Summary Review of Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks for Structural Health Monitoring. The Shock and Vibration Digest. https://doi.org/10.1177/0583102406061499
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.
