Cited by 2,899Structural Health Monitoring TechniquesBladed Disk Vibration DynamicsUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation

Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical systems from changes in their vibration characteristics: a literature review

Open access
Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States), Doebling, S, USDOE, Washington, DC (United States), Farrar, C, Prime, M, Shevitz, D·1996

Abstract

This report contains a review of the technical literature concerning the detection, location, and characterization of structural damage via techniques that examine changes in measured structural vibration response. The report first categorizes the methods according to required measured data and analysis technique. The analysis categories include changes in modal frequencies, changes in measured mode shapes (and their derivatives), and changes in measured flexibility coefficients. Methods that use property (stiffness, mass, damping) matrix updating, detection of nonlinear response, and damage detection via neural networks are also summarized. The applications of the various methods to different types of engineering problems are categorized by type of structure and are summarized. The types of structures include beams, trusses, plates, shells, bridges, offshore platforms, other large civil structures, aerospace structures, and composite structures. The report describes the development of the damage-identification methods and applications and summarizes the current state-of-the-art of the technology. The critical issues for future research in the area of damage identification are also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2172/249299

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Los Alamos National Lab., N. (. S., Doebling, S., USDOE, W., Farrar, C., Prime, M., & Shevitz, D.
Published
1996-05-01
OpenAlex
W2100722180
Cited by
2,899
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 98 · 2022: 103 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 105 · 2019: 112 · 2018: 128 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 135 · 2015: 154 · 2014: 158 · 2013: 172 · 2012: 124
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
  • DOE (W-7405-ENG-36)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Bladed Disk Vibration Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Keywords
structural damage detection, structural health monitoring, vibration-based damage detection, flexibility coefficient, stiffness matrix updating, nonlinear structural response, beams, trusses, plates, shells, bridges, offshore platforms, aerospace structures, composite 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