Cited by 54Structural Health Monitoring TechniquesUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationNon-Destructive Testing Techniques

Wavelet packet energy–based damage identification of wood utility poles using support vector machine multi-classifier and evidence theory

Yu, Yang, Dackermann, Ulrike, Li, Jianchun, Niederleithinger, Ernst·2019·Structural Health Monitoring

Abstract

This article presents a novel assessment framework to identify the health condition of wood utility poles. The innovative approach is based on the integration of data mining and machine learning methods and combines advanced signal processing, multi-sensor data fusion and decision ensembles to classify different damage condition types of wood poles. In the proposed framework, wavelet packet analysis is employed to transform captured multi-channel stress wave signals into energy information, which is consequently compressed by principal component analysis to extract a feature vector. Furthermore, support vector machine multi-classifier, optimized by genetic algorithm, is designed to identify the pole condition type. Finally, evidence theory is applied to fuse different assessment results from different sensors for a final decision. For validation of the proposed approach, the wood pole specimens with three common damage condition types are tested using a novel multi-sensor narrow-band frequency-excitation non-destructive testing system in the laboratory. The final experimental analysis results confirm that the proposed approach is capable of making full use of multi-sensor information and providing an effective and accurate identification on types of conditions in wood poles.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1475921718798622

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yu, Y., Dackermann, U., Li, J., & Niederleithinger, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Sydney (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Federal Institute For Materials Research and Testing (DE)
Corresponding author
Yu, Yang
Venue
Structural Health Monitoring
Published
2018-09-28
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
123-142
ISSN
  • 1475-9217 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3168
OpenAlex
W2892871933
Cited by
54
References
37
Citations by year
2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7
FWCI
5.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Structural Health Monitoring (publishedVersion)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (LP110200162)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
Keywords
damage detection, wavelet packet energy, sensor fusion, Dempster-Shafer theory, support vector machine, genetic algorithm optimization, principal component analysis, non-destructive testing

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