CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Structural Health Monitoring TechniquesSeismic Performance and AnalysisMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Damage detection of nonlinear structures with analytical mode decomposition and Hilbert transform

Wang, Zuo-Cai, Geng, Dong, Ren, Wei-Xin, Chen, Gen-Da, Zhang, Guang-Feng·2015·Smart Structures and Systems
DOI 10.12989/sss.2015.15.1.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper proposes an analytical mode decomposition (AMD) and Hilbert transform method for structural nonlinearity quantification and damage detection under earthquake loads. The measured structural response is first decomposed into several intrinsic mode functions (IMF) using the proposed AMD method. Each IMF is an amplitude modulated-frequency modulated signal with narrow frequency bandwidth. Then, the instantaneous frequencies of the decomposed IMF can be defined with Hilbert transform. However, for a nonlinear structure, the defined instantaneous frequencies from the decomposed IMF are not equal to the instantaneous frequencies of the structure itself. The theoretical derivation in this paper indicates that the instantaneous frequency of the decomposed measured response includes a slowly-varying part which represents the instantaneous frequency of the structure and rapidly-varying part for a nonlinear structure subjected to earthquake excitations. To eliminate the rapidly-varying part effects, the instantaneous frequency is integrated over time duration. Then the degree of nonlinearity index, which represents the damage severity of structure, is defined based on the integrated instantaneous frequency in this paper. A one-story hysteretic nonlinear structure with various earthquake excitations are simulated as numerical examples and the degree of nonlinearity index is obtained. Finally, the degree of nonlinearity index is estimated from the experimental data of a seven-story building under four earthquake excitations. The index values for the building subjected to a low intensity earthquake excitation, two medium intensity earthquake excitations, and a large intensity earthquake excitation are calculated as 12.8%, 23.0%, 23.2%, and 39.5%, respectively.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.12989/sss.2015.15.1.001

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. 1995, Int. J. Anal. Exper. Modal Anal, 10, 260
  2. 2006, SIAM J. Appl. Math, 66, 648
  3. 1976, J. Eng. Mech, 102, 249

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 12

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wang, Z.-C., Geng, D., Ren, W.-X., Chen, G.-D., & Zhang, G.-F.
ORCID
Venue
Smart Structures and Systems
Publisher
Techno-Press
Published
2015-01-25
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
1-13
ISSN
1738-1584 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.12989/sss.2015.15.1.001
OpenAlex
W2031299350
Cited by
12
References
31
Citations by year
2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Smart Structures and Systems (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Seismic Performance and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Machine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Keywords
damage detection, nonlinear structures, Hilbert transform, intrinsic mode functions, instantaneous frequency, earthquake response, hysteretic structures

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