Structural Health Monitoring

Ajit Mal and Sauvik Banerjee

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Department
University of California, Los Angeles

Fabrizio Ricci
Dipartimento di Progettazione Aeronautica
University of Naples Federico II – Italy

Frank Shih
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Seattle University
 Structural health monitoring (SHM)

A structural Health Monitoring System (HMS) can be defined as a tool to

continuously observe the degradation of Aircraft, Aerospace, Mechanical and
Civil structures in service, with minimum manual intervention

The system should

¾ evaluate changes in critical
structural parameters from
baseline

¾ assess structural integrity

¾ recommend maintenance
strategy
 An autonomous SHM system

Motivation
¾ Hidden flaws caused by aging, service loads or manufacturing processes, if left
undetected, can lead to catastrophic failure of a structure.
¾ Conventional inspections/maintenance on regular basis are costly and often
unnecessary.
¾ On-board autonomous health monitoring systems integrated into the design
will increase the safety and reduce the maintenance cost significantly

Major features of the proposed SHM system

¾ Analysis of data recorded by a network of distributed sensors in critical areas

of structure.
¾ Low frequency narrowband sensors to record modal response
¾ High frequency broadband sensors to record motion due to wave propagation
¾ Analysis of recorded data using a damage index approach
¾ The procedure can be automated requiring minimum operator intervention
 Effects of damage on the modal response of a beam

Aluminum beam

Excitation (input) δ(t)

Damage Locations
A B

1 2 3 456 7 8
Control Points (output)

Damage was simulated by progressively reducing Frequency response function (FRF) as

the area moment of inertia to 15 % in steps of 5 % velocity square at control point #6 on the
in one element of the beam, which constitutes 2% beam produced by load, δ(t). Damage
of its entire volume. location A

¾ The simulated flaw appears to have very small effects on the modal response of
beam.
¾ It would be difficult if not impossible to use the modal properties directly to
identify damage in the beam.
 Effects of damage on the modal response of a beam (cont.)

Damage (D )i , DL =
{ } ∗ {V }
2 T
V i DL i
2
DL Damage (D )i , j , DL =
{ V } ∗ {V }
2 T
i DL
2
j DL

index 1: {V } ∗ { V }
i
2 T
DL = 0 i
2
DL = 0
index 2: {V } ∗ { V }
2 T
i DL = 0
2
j DL = 0

DL is the damage level (0 - 3) and {Vi 2 } is the velocity-squared response vector (700 elements
DL
consisting f = 0 – 14 kHz at steps of 20 Hz) at node # i at damage level DL.

1.120 DL = 0 (No Damage)

1.150
DL = 0 (No Damage) DL = 1
1.100 DL = 2
DL = 1
DL = 3
DL = 2
1.100 1.080
DL = 3
1.060

Damage Index 2
Damage Index 1

1.050 1.040

1.020
1.000
1.000

0.980
0.950
0.960

0.940
0.900 CP#4_1 CP#4_2 CP#4_3 CP#4_4 CP#4_5 CP#4_6 CP#4_7 CP#4_8
CP#1 CP#2 CP#3 CP#4 CP#5 CP#6 CP#7 CP#8 Control Point
Control point
Damage location A. Damage index 2 showing
Damage location B. Damage index 1 correlation of CP #4 with others

Damage indices increase with the level of damage, and more importantly, the
increase is pronounced at control points closer to the damage location.
 Effects of damage on the modal response of a plate

Fixed ended unidirectional graphite/epoxy composite plate

Fiber direction
Fiber direction
7 8 9
7 8 9

A. 75 B. 75
4 5
6 4 5
25 .5 6
25 1 2 12.5
.5
75 37 0 37
.5
37.5 20 75 0
37.5 20
25 1 2 Source 25 2
3 1 3 Source
1 75 75 Control points 1 75 75 Control points
25 25
Damaged area Damaged area
12 .5 × 12 .5 37 .5 × 37 .5
200 10 % reduction of Ex , Ey 200 25 % reduction of Ex , Ey
- Dimensions are in mm - Dimensions are in mm

A. Simulated damage over a small area B. Simulated damage over a large area

FRFs
Point 2 (left)
and
Point 5 (right)
 Effects of damage on the modal response of a plate (cont.)
The damage index approach

Damage index

(D ) = 1 −
{R } * {R }
T
i DL i DL
i , DL
{R } * {R }
i
T
DL = 0 i DL = 0

A. Damage index for small damage B. Damage index for large damage

¾ Damage indices increase with level of damage

¾ Indices are high at control points closer to the damage
¾ Major damage within the structure can easily be identified from the
high values of the indices
 Damage identification using wave propagation approach

A network of PZT transducers (sources and

receivers) are located on the surface of the plate.
Pre-impact wave The elastic waves generated by the source are
propagation test acquired by receivers, pre-processed in an
ultrasonic date acquisition system and stored in the
computer for analysis.

Impact test Impact test is performed using an instrumented

drop weight test frame Instron/Dynatup 8250.

Post-impact wave After the plate has been impacted, wave

propagation test propagation tests are repeated using the same
transducer configuration as in the pre-impact tests.

(D1) = 1 −
{F }
T
i post −impact * {F }
i post −impact
Evaluation of
damage index
i
{F }
T
i pre−impact * {F }
i pre −impact

Fi = response vector
 The wave propagation and impact experiments

Waveform generator

Any one of the transducers can be used as a source

to send specific signal using waveform generator

Data acquisition system for the

ultrasonic wave propagation test Schematics of the Dynatup 8250
for impact test
 Damage identification in a composite plate
Acoustic emission (AE) waves from low velocity impact

14 lb (no damage) External appearance (61 lb)

0.30 0.40
A A

Amplitude (V)
0.15 0.20

Amplitude
0.00 0.00

-0.15 -0.20

-0.30 -0.40
-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Time (µs) Time (µs)

Theory
61 lb (delamination)
0.40 0.40
A A
Ultrasonic C-scan (61 lb)
Amplitude (V)

0.20 0.20

Amplitude
0.00 0.00

-0.20 -0.20

-0.40 -0.40
-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Time (µs) Time µ
( s)

Theory

Waveforms recorded on [0/90]8s cross-ply graphite

epoxy composite plates. Impactor was dropped
from a height of 225 mm.
Damage identification in a composite plate (cont.)
Wavelet transforms of AE waves

No damage Damage
 Damage identification in a composite plate (cont.)
Typical recorded waveforms

Source
4.2 mm thick [0/90]8s graphite/epoxy plate

30 mm 30 mm
7 8 9

Damage extension
30 mm

4 5 6
30 mm

delamination
15 mm

1 2 3
Source
15 mm Receiver

Ultrasonic C-scan of the damaged plate

showing the hidden defects. Sources,
receivers and damaged area
Recorded signals at receiver #6
 Damage identification in a composite plate (cont.)
The damage index approach

Frequency spectra of the recorded signals at #6 Damage index at the control points

¾ Delamination modifies the elastic waves propagating between the source

and the receivers.

¾ The influence is pronounced at points 3 and 6, near damage – and can be

localized successfully
 Damage identification in a composite plate (contd.)

Typical recorded signal and its frequency spectrum; damage indices

Signal time history (receiver)
596 8.00E-03

Pre impact
6.00E-03

Post impact
4.00E-03
1 2 3 4 5

Amplitude [V]
2.00E-03
242

0.00E+00

-2.00E-03
6 7 8 9 10

-4.00E-03

Source -6.00E-03

Receiver 0.00E+00 1.00E-05 2.00E-05 3.00E-05 4.00E-05 5.00E-05 6.00E-05 7.00E-05

Time [s]
Impact Point
Signal frequency content (receiver) 0.35
1

0.3

0.1

Pre impact 0.25

0.01
Post impact
Amplitude [V]

0.2

0.001 D1
0.15

0.0001
0.1

0.00001
0.05

0.000001
0
0.E+00 2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+06 1.E+06 2.E+06 2.E+06 2.E+06

Frequency [Hz]
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Point (receiver)
 Damage identification in a composite plate (cont.)
3 mm dia. hole
4 3 ¾ Damage index set Si; i is the source location.

20 mm
¾ Sets S1, S3 and S4 show the highest index at the
40 mm control point 2, which is closer to the 7 mm dia. hole.

7 mm dia. hole
25 mm
¾ For set S2, the damage index is highest at control
80 mm

point 4, since the hole falls in the path of the waves

from 2 to 4.
35 mm

¾ Some insight about the presence of the smaller hole

1 2 can be obtained when indices at locations 3 and 4 are
100 mm considered from set S4 and S3, respectively.
Any one of the transducers is used as a ¾ Onset of damage within a region can be predicted
source and the others receive the signals. with some confidence.

S1 S2 S3 S4
 Concluding remarks

¾ The approach outlined here can be used for the characterization of

materials degradation and the development of health monitoring systems for
aircraft, aerospace and other advanced structures.

¾ For complex structures under realistic service conditions, the vibrational

data are expected to provide information on the existence and the general
location of major defects only (e.g., widespread damage).

¾ The wave based approach yields more detailed information on the location
and nature of small hidden defects.

¾ The computer assisted automatic analysis of data should improve the

reliability and practical applicability of the detection system to defects-
critical structures.