Int. j. eng. sci., Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014. pp.

6-18

TI Journals

ISSN:

International Journal of Engineering Sciences

2306-6474

www.tijournals.com

Copyright 2014. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of

identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
Alireza Entezami *
M.Eng. student of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

Hashem Shariatmadar
Associate Professor, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
*Corresponding author: entezami@stu-mail.um.ac.ir

Keywords

Abstract

Structural damage assessment

Identified modal parameters
Improved sensitivity method
Pseudo-inverse method

This study aims to assessment of damage in the dynamic structures that related to discrete and continuous
systems. The proposed method uses eigenvalue and eigenvector sensitivity matrices to detect and locate
damage based on reduction of stiffness of structures. For damage detection process, the modal parameters of
healthy and damaged structures are required. Also, initial physical properties of undamaged structures such
as mass and stiffness matrices must be used for modal identification. The modal parameters are normally
identified by numerical eigenvalue problem with assumption of existence of proportional damping. Damage
is assumed to be directly related to a reduction of stiffness matrices. Damage parameters are extracted of
general concept of sensitivity analysis and are determined according to calculation of modal sensitivity
matrices and difference between eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the healthy and damaged states. The
approach is firstly verified via a simple 6-story shear building that can be assumed as discrete system.
Subsequently, a 15-bar planner truss is used and damaged elements are detected by proposed damage
identification methods. For experimental modal testing, it is expected that there would be some deviations of
results due to the noisy measurement. Therefore, for consideration of contaminated modal data to damage
detection process, the random noise affect in the identified vibrational modes. Numerical results show high
capability of proposed methods to detect damages based on modal sensitivity approach when noise is
present.

1.

Introduction

Structural damage detection using measured dynamic data has emerged as new research in civil, mechanical and aerospace engineering
communities in recent years. The basic idea of this technique is that modal parameters are functions of the physical properties of the structures
such as mass, stiffness or damping. Therefore, changes in the physical properties will cause changes in the modal parameters. Damage is
generally defined as the adversely performance of dynamic behaviour in the structures that related to changes of physical properties. In the other
words, the occurrence of damage in a structure modifies some of its mass, stiffness or damping properties, changing the vibrational response of
the structure. Therefore, the knowledge of the vibrational behaviour of a structure can be used to determine the existence as well as location and
extent of damage. An early diagnostic of structural damage reduces maintenance costs and increases the structure safety and reliability. While
visual inspections fail to assess the damage at early stages, vibration measurements are sufficiently sensitive to detect damage even when it is
situated in hidden or internal areas. For this reason, there is a growing interest in the application of vibration-based damage detection methods. It
is known that modal parameters such as natural frequencies and mode shapes are sensitive indicators of damage. Several techniques have been
implemented to detect damage using modal properties, Carden and Fanning [1] and Doebling et al. [2] and Salawu et al. [3] review many of
these methods. An inconvenience of these methods is that most of them require an accurate numerical model of the structure. Some methods that
require a numerical model of the structure are changes in mode shape curvature proposed by Pandey et al. [4] the strain energy also known as
damage index method by Shi and Law [5]. Yang et al. [6] proposed a method of damage detection using invariance property of element modal
strain energy. Changes in physical properties of structures such as stiffness and flexibility matrices accomplished by Ge and Lue [7]. Also, Yan
and Golinval [8] also proposed a damage diagnosis technique based on changes in dynamically measured flexibility and stiffness of structures
and investigated in a cantilever beam and a simulated three-span bridges. From the methods mentioned earlier, the damage index method has
given the best results. Farrar and Jauregui [9, 10] compared the performance of five damage assessment methods, in the damage detection of the
I-40 Bridge. In general, the damage index method performed the best, although for the most severe damage case all the methods accurately
locate the damage. Humar et al. [11] studied the performance of several damage identification algorithms, they concluded that the damage index
method appears to be most successful in predicting the damage location; in addition, it was the most tolerant with experimental noise.
This paper proposes a method based on numerical sensitivities of modal parameters to detect and locate damage in the dynamic structures. The
method computes eigenvalue (natural frequency) and eigenvector (mode shape) sensitivities using the simulated modal data in the healthy state.
The simulated modal parameters are normally identified by generalized eigenvalue problem. In this case, only mass and stiffness matrices of
healthy structure are used. In the other words, the damping matrix is assumed as proportional. Damage is considered to be directly related to a
decrease in stiffness. Damage parameters are extracted of general concept of sensitivity analysis and are determined according to calculation of
modal sensitivity matrices and difference between eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the healthy and damaged states. The approach is verified by a
simple 6-story shear building that can be considered as discrete dynamic system when complete modal data are available. Subsequently, a 15-bar
planner truss is used with incomplete modal parameters. In both cases results are compared with those obtained with the damage index method.

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Eventually, the numerical results show that the proposed method can provide a better behaviour with multiple damage and the location and
severity of structural damage are accurately estimated by sensitivities methods when noise is present.

2.
2.1

Theory
Sensitivity analysis

The sensitivity method is based upon linearization of the generally non-linear relationship between measurable outputs, such as natural
frequencies, mode shapes or displacement responses and the parameters of the model in need of correction. Mottershead et al. [12] present a
general formulation for sensitivity analysis based on dynamic behaviour of structure.

z zm z ri Gi i

(1)

The residual, ri, is dened at the ith iteration as

ri zm zi

(2)

So that linearization is carried out at =i. The measured and analytically predicted outputs are denoted by zm and zi=z(i),which typically may
be eigenfrequencies and mode-shapes or complex frequency response functions. The sensitivity matrix G is given by

z
Gi j
k i

(3)

where j=1,2, , q denotes the output data points and k=1,2, , p is the parameter index. The sensitivity matrix Gi is computed at the current
value of the complete vector of parameters =i. The error, z, is assumed to be small for parameters h in the vicinity of i. At the each iterations
Eq. (1) is solved for

i i

(4)

and the model is then updated to give

i1 i i

(5)

This procedure continues until consecutive estimates i and i+1 are sufciently converged. At the damage detection process the sensitivity
method is defined as relationship between healthy and damaged structures and according to Eq. (5) for damaged and healthy structures, is given
by

d h

(6)

In this section, consider which the following residuals, are introduced as real eigenvalues, real eigenvectors. Based on these relationships,
damaged parameters are determined by sensitivities of eigenvalues and eigenvectors as follow:

S b
S b

(7)
(8)

S is the sensitivity matrix. and are the error quantities containing the differences in eigenvalues and eigenvectors for healthy and damaged
structures. According to Eq. (6) the modal data distinction before and after damage are described as =d-h and =d-h, respectively. Also
the subscript d and h denote damaged and healthy structure, respectively.
2.2

Eigenvalue and eigenvector sensitivity matrices

The proposed algorithm is based on changes in modal parameters such as mode shape and natural frequency with respect to the stiffness
parameters. Design sensitivity analysis is used to quantify the relationship calculate outputs used to measure their performance. Design
sensitivity analysis of structural and mechanical systems with respect to structural design parameters plays a critical role in inverse and
identification problems applications, as well as structural health monitoring, structural reliability, dynamic model updating, structural design
optimization, structural dynamic modification and damage detection [13]. These sensitivities describe the rates of change of some of key
properties of the dynamic model such as natural frequencies and mode shapes with small changes in some of the model parameters consist of
individual mass and stiffness matrices [14]. Some of the modal sensitivities are very computational expensive, since they require the complete

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

modal data [15] or inverse of large matrices [16]. The eigenvalue sensitivities can be defined with respect to an arbitrary variable, p, which might
be an individual mass or stiffness in the original model [12, 14]. This sensitivities equation is generally expanded from undamped eigenvalue
problem as follow.

i
M
T K
i
i
i
b
b
b

(9)

where M and K are mass and stiffness matrices of healthy structure, respectively. In addition to and are eigenvalue and eigenvector of
healthy structure, respectively. Damage is considered to be directly related to a decrease in stiffness. Hence with neglecting of the mass matrix
the Eq. (1) is rewritten to form:

i
T K
i
i
b
b

(10)

Also, Ewins [14] and Mottershead et al. [12] proposed a eigenvector sensitivities method based on expansion of undamped generalized
eigenvalue problems which describes as follow:

1
M
T K
i i
i j
b
b
j 1 j i

(11)

Wang [17] proposed a method that required Only the first n mode shapes and the computation of the flexibility matrix of the structure:

1
K
M
T
j i
i j
b
b
j 1 j i

n
M
1
T
K
K
i

j 1
j

(12)

M
1
T M
K

i
i i
i j i
b
2
b
b
Assuming the mass matrix constant, its derivatives are zero and therefore Eq. (4) becomes

i
b

n
1
K
1
T K
T K
j i j K i j i j
b
b
b
j 1 j i
j 1 j

(13)

Lin et al. [18] proposed an improved eigenvector sensitivity method for model updating, which uses both analytical and experimental mode
shapes. This method can be rewritten in terms of undamaged/damage structure mode shapes, as follows.

d i
b

n
1
K
1
T K
T K
j d i j K d i j d i j
b
b
b
j 1 dj i
j 1 j

(14)

where d and d denote the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of damaged structure, respectively. As mentioned before, in this study the damage
index was introduced as stiffness reduction and the parameter b=k. Hence, for determination of eigenvalue and eigenvector sensitivities
matrices, the sensitivity of stiffness matric should be solved. Note the right term of expressions (10) and (14) requires the evaluations of K/b,
which can be cumbersome to precisely evaluate the differentiation of every given type of finite element. To easily implement of K/b in
programming, the semi-analytical method has been proposed to replace this exact manner of differentiation by the numerical differentiation
scheme [13].

K K( b b ) K( b )

b
b
or

(15)

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

K K( b b ) K( b b )

b
2b

(16)

This technology has become a very popular method and has been implemented in many common nite element programs. Although the semianalytical method is easy to implement, it employs possible errors.
2.3

Identification of location and severity of damage

In this section, structural damage parameters are estimated by solving of Eq. (7) for eigenvalue (natural frequency) sensitivity matrix and Eq. (8)
related to eigenvector (mode shape) sensitivity matrix, respectively. To attain this aim, sensitivity matrices of modal parameters for healthy and
damaged structures must be established firstly. Then, differences of modal parameters as error matrices of eigenvalue and eigenvectors of
healthy and damaged structures are provided. According to Eq. (6), error distinct of modal data is obtained by below formulations.

d h

(17)

d h

(18)

The sensitivity matrix of eigenvalue changes in the dynamic structures is determined as follow:
T

S i

K
i
b

(19)

or alternatively the sensitivity matrix S contains the first-order derivatives of m eigenvalues with respect to r damage variables (b) as in:

1
b
1
2
S b1

m
b1

1
b2
2
b2

m
b2

1
br

br

br

(20)

Also sensitivity matrix of eigenvector changes can be demonstrated as follow:

m

n
1
K
1
T K
T K

j i j
i j i j

b
j 1
j 1
j
i
j

(21)

The eigenvector sensitivity matrix S can be rewritten as the first-order derivatives of m mode shapes with respect to r damage variables (b) as
in:

1
b
1
2
S b1

m
b1

1
b2
2
b2

m
b2

1
br

br

br

(22)

As before mentioned, for damage detection process, the expressions of (7) and (8) must be solved. The least-squares or penalty function method
are adequate technique to calculation of damage variables. The sensitivity-based, least-squares or penalty function method exploits a truncated
Taylor series expansion of natural frequencies and mode shapes for iteratively updating the damage variables that minimize a penalty function
[19]. The changes in eigenvalues =d-h and eigenvectors =d-h are expressed as a function of the difference in the damage variable
vector b=bd-bh. Here, the damage variable vector bh represents the healthy state of the structural parameters, whose elements should each be
one (or 100%). First, the sensitivity, or Jacobean matrix S, is developed using the nite-difference method. The differences between eigenvalues
and eigenvectors of healthy and damaged are computed and pre-multiplied by the pseudo-inverse of the sensitivity matrix S+ yielding the
updated damage variable vector b.

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

10

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

b S

(23)

b S

(24)

In these expressions, the subscripts + denotes the pseudo-inverse. As the sensitivity matrix S is a non-square matrix, the simplest case of
pseudo-inverse of S can be given by

S S T SS T

(25)

It can be seen, expression (23) and (24) describe the damage localization and quantification in damaged structure. Only with determination of the
modal parameters of healthy and damaged structures as well as initial properties of healthy structure, the location and severity of structural
damage can be estimated. Also, inversing of incomplete modal data and non-square construction by these data is solved via pseudo-inverse
technique.

3.
3.1

Application
A 6-story shear building as discrete dynamic structure

The numerical model is considered a 6-story shear building shown in Fig. 1, which can be modeled as a 6-DOF system with following
properties. Consider the beams were confined in the slabs and behave as rigid body; therefore, the stiffness of each story is defined by
summation of columns stiffness. Also, the mass of each story is accounted according to half weight of above and below walls weight as well as
the slab weight of each story, respectively. The shear building can be considered as discrete dynamic system, hence the mass and stiffness
matrices of shear building are determined by finite element method [20, 21]

Table 1. Physical properties of 6 story shear building

Physical Properties

Story 1

Story 2

Story 3

Story 4

Story 5

Story 6

Mass (Ton)

10

10

10

Stiffness (Ton/m)

125

125

111

95

95

83

Figure 1. a) Full-scale shear building frame, b) Simulated shear building frame, c) Discrete dynamic system modeling of shear building frame

11

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

In this structure the stiffness reduction is defined as damage index. Four damage cases are considered to investigate the location and number of
damaged stories on the results. In the first case, the stiffness of story 1 was decreased by 40%. In the second case, the stiffness of stories 2 and 5
were reduced by 30% and 20% respectively. In the damage case three, the stiffness of story 3 was decreased via 30%. Finally, in the fourth
damage case, the stiffness of stories 3 and 4 were reduced by 10% and 20%, respectively. According to the physical properties and identified
simulated modal parameters of 6-story shear building, the dynamic behaviour changes by natural frequencies comparison are demonstrated
according to Table 2.
Table 2. Natural frequencies of 6-story shear building in undamaged and damaged cases
Damage Cases

Mode 1

Mode 2

Mode 3

Mode 4

Mode 5

Mode 6

Undamaged

0.9230

2.4558

3.9743

5.0845

6.1236

6.5575

Case 1

0.8404

2.2819

3.7944

4.9722

6.0360

6.5243

Case 2

0.8665

2.3047

3.7181

4.8031

5.9478

6.4891

Case 3

0.8989

2.4514

3.8202

5.0235

6.0528

6.4273

Case 4

0.8961

2.3830

3.8889

4.8763

6.0742

6.3450

As can be seen, the stiffness reduction has been led to change at the dynamic behaviour. In the other words, the adversely performance of
dynamic behaviour due to damages are led to decrease of natural frequencies. In this example, it is assumed that the complete modal parameters
were identified. Hence, the difference of eigenvectors and eigenvalues can be readily calculated. Figures (2) to (5) indicate the location and
severity of identified damage cases based on modal sensitivities approaches.

Figure 2. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 1 (noise free data)

Figure 3. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 2 (noise free data)

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

12

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Figure 4. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 3 (noise free data)

Figure 5. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 3 (noise free data)

The results show that the modal sensitivities methods can be exactly detected the location of damage and can be estimated the damage severity.
It should be noticed that the central column of figures illustrate the induced damage cases and right-side as well as left-side of figures indicate
the eigenvalue sensitivity and eigenvector sensitivity methods, respectively. However, the proposed damage detection methods can be predicated
the damage states, the eigenvector sensitivity method is more accurate than eigenvalue sensitivity method. As a result, the measured or identified
eigenvalues (modal frequencies) are more accurate than the eigenvectors (mode shapes), but modification in eigenvalues cannot provide spatial
information about the structural damage or they are not sensitive to the local damage. Therefore, the error function for eigenvalue sensitivity
method is about 10% to 25%, whereas, the eigenvector sensitivity method has error function less than 5%.
3.2

A 15-bar planner truss as continuous dynamic structure

To illustrate characteristics of the proposed damage detection algorithm, a two-dimensional truss structure is presented as shown Fig. 5. The
basic parameters of the structure are Young modules E=200 GPa, density =7850 kg/m3. All element of truss are modeled with 100 mm 100
mm equal double angels and 5 mm thickness. Each nodal of truss have two degrees freedom (DOF). In this example, the first 5 vibrating modes
are used for identifying the damage.
The following structure is a continuous dynamic system and the mass and stiffness matrices can be determined by basic concept of finite element
method [20]. After determination of physical parameters of intact truss structure, the generalized eigenvalue problem is used and the modal
parameters including natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated. Assume that the proportional damping is dominated in the structure
behaviour and consequently the modal parameters are extracted as real data.

13

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Figure 6. A 15-bar planner truss as continuous dynamic system

Four damage cases are considered to investigate the influence of the location, severity and number of the damaged elements on the results. In the
first damage case, the stiffness of elements 2 and 14 were reduced by 40%. In damage case number two, the stiffness of elements 6, 9 and 12
were decreased by 20%, 25% and 30%, respectively. In damage case number three, the stiffness elements 1, 8 and 15 were reduced via 30%,
30% and 20%, respectively. Finally, in damage case number four, the stiffness of elements 6 and 13 were decreased by 20% and 30%,
respectively. Changing of stiffness matrix is modified the truss dynamic behaviour. In the other words, reduction of the natural frequencies is
caused the damage occurrence damage in the truss structure. The location and severity of induced damage cases are detected by proposed modal
sensitivities methods as follow.

Figure 7. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 1 (noise free data)

Figure 8. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 2 (noise free data)

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

14

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Figure 9. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 3 (noise free data)

Figure 10. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 4 (noise free data)

As can be indicated, both proposed methods have been precisely identified the location of damage cases with respect to eigenvalue and
eigenvector sensitivities approaches when the incomplete modal data are present. Based on above figures, the central column of bar charts
indicates the induced damage cases and the right-side and left-side of induced column are identified damage quantities based on eigenvalue and
eigenvector sensitivities methods, respectively. The error function of calculation of identified damages in the eigenvector sensitivity method is
less than the eigenvalue sensitivity method. In the other words, the calculation error of identified damage via eigenvector sensitivity method is
about 2% to 8%, whereas, eigenvalue sensitivity method have error function about 12% to 25%. As a result, eigenvector sensitivity method have
better results is estimation of damage severity.

4.

Noisy measurements

For experimental modal testing, it is expected that there would be some deviations of results due to the noisy measurement. In the numerical
examples, noise is simulated by adding a series of pseudo-random numbers to the theoretically calculated frequencies and mode shapes. There
are many types of error that can be introduced into mathematical model to simulate noisy measurements. Due to the complexity of the
measurement process, any single type of random errors may be experienced in the eld. Therefore, two types of simple random errors were used
to model measurement noise, uniform error; with equal probability at any one time, normal distribution; with higher probability of a noise level
closer to the mean value and a lower probability of a larger noise [22]. In this study, 0.5% proportional uniform noise applied to modal
eigenvectors (mode shapes) and eigenvalues (natural frequencies) have been considered noise frees [23]. Next, the modal eigenvector is
contaminated with 5% random noise in this study of the measurement error effect. The contaminated signal is represented as [24].

ij ij 1 i max, j

(26)

15

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

where and are the eigenvector components of the jth mode at the ith degrees of freedom with noise and without noise, respectively; i is the
random number with a mean equal to zero and a variance equal to 1; is the random noise level; and max,j is the largest component in the jth
eigenvector. Damage detection algorithms will be repeated by a set of error polluted data created by Eq. (26).

Figure 11. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 1 (5% noisy data)

Figure 12. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 2 (5% noisy data)

Figure 13. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 3 (5% noisy data)

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

16

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Figure 14. Predicated damage in the shear building, Scenario 4 (5% noisy data)

As can be seen, influence of contaminated modes has been caused that the magnitude of damage severity has declined compared to noise free
data. At the both proposed methods, eigenvectors sensitivity method has better results than other one. Nevertheless, damage localization with
noisy data enables to exactly locate the induced damages in the shear building when all vibrational modes are present. In order to, evaluate the
noise effects in the planner truss, the simulated modal parameters in the healthy and damaged states, are polluted by 5% random noise based on
Eq. (26). According to expressions (20) and (22) the noisy data can be modify the modal sensitivity matrices. Therefore, the damage localization
and quantification must be accurately assessed. Results of damage detection process on the planner truss were obtained using the first five mode
shapes with contaminated random noise. Figure (14) to (17) illustrate the assessment of damage based on noisy data.

Figure 15. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 1 (5% noisy data)

Figure 16. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 2 (5% noisy data)

17

Structural damage assessment by using improved sensitivity of identified modal data based on stiffness modification index
International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

Figure 17. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 3 (5% noisy data)

Figure 18. Predicated damage in the planner truss, Scenario 4 (5% noisy data)

Similar to prior section, the damage locations in the planner truss have been precisely detected based on incomplete and noisy modal data. But
the severity of damage has reduced; especially at the eigenvalue sensitivity method. Indeed, the identified damage errors by eigenvalue
sensitivity method are about 15% to 30%. In contrast, the eigenvector sensitivity method has reliable results compared to eigenvalue method.
Based on incomplete and noisy modal data, errors in the damage quantification are only about 4% to 10%. It can be indicated that the magnitude
of damage is closed to noise free data state.

5.

Conclusion

This paper presents an approach for damage detection in structure utilizing sensitivities of modal parameters. Eigenvalues and eigenvectors are
defined as general modal parameters in the vibrational structures and are characterized as a function of structural stiffness and mass parameters.
These function are described the sensitivities of modal parameters based on stiffness changes. The proposed methods consist of two states. In the
first state, eigenvalue sensitivity matrix is constructed and damage parameters were solved by least-square approach. In the second state,
eigenvector sensitivity matrix based on healthy and damaged structures is determined. Next, similar to prior method, the damage parameter is
estimated by solving of pseudo-inverse approach. For verification of proposed method, first a simple 6-story shear building is modelled as
discrete dynamic system. Subsequently, a 15-bar planner truss structure as continuous dynamic system is evaluated. The limitation of noisy
modal data is considered in the damage detection process and eigenvectors of vibrational structures are contaminated by random noise. Damage
detection process consists of estimate of damage location and identifies the damage severity. The numerical results indicate that the proposed
modal sensitivity methods can provide the reliable results for damage detection. However, eigenvector sensitivity method is more accurate than
eigenvalue sensitivity method.

Alireza Entezami *, Hashem Shariatmadar

18

International Journal of Engineering Sciences Vol(3), No (2), February, 2014.

References
[1]
[2]

[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]

E. Carden, Fanning, P., "Vibration Based Condition Monitoring: A Review," Structural Health Monitoring, vol. 3, pp. 355377, 2004.
S. W. Doebling, Farrar, C.R., Prime, M.B. and Shevitz, D.W., "Damage identification and healthmonitoring of structural andmechanical systems from
changes in their vibration characteristics: a literature review," Research Rep. No. LA-13070-MS, ESA-EA, Los Alamos National Laboratory NM, USA,
1996.
O. S. Salawu, "Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review," Engineering Strucutres vol. 19, pp. 718-723, 1997.
A. Pandey, Biswas, M., Samman, M., "Damage Detection from Changes in Curvature Mode Shapes," Journal of sound and vibration, vol. 145, pp. 321
332, 1991.
Z. Y. Shi, Law, S.S, "Structural damage localization from modal strain energy change," Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 215, pp. 825-844, 1998.
H. Z. Yang, Li, H.J. , Wang, S.Q., "Damage localization of offshore platforms under ambient excitation," China Ocean Engineering, vol. 14, pp. 177-194,
2003.
M. Ge, Lui, E.M., "Structural damage identification using system dynamic properties," Computers and Structures, vol. 83, pp. 2185-2196, 2005.
A. Yan, Golinval, J.Claude., "Structural damage localization by combining exibility and stiffness methods," Engineering Structures, vol. 27, pp. 1752
1761, 2005.
C. Farrar, Jauregui, D., "Comparative Study of Damage Identification Algorithms Applied to a Bridge, Part I: Experiment," Smart Materials and
Structures, vol. 7, pp. 704-719, 1998.
C. Farrar, Jauregui, D., "Comparative Study of Damage Identification Algorithms Applied to a Bridge, Part II: Numerical Study," Smart Materials and
Structures, vol. 7, pp. 720-731, 1998.
J. Humar, Bagchi, A., Xu, H., "Performance of Vibration-based Techniques for the Identification of Structural Damage," Structural Health Monitoring,
vol. 5, p. 215, 2006.
J. E. Mottershead, Link, Michael., Friswell, Michael I.,, "The sensitivity method in nite element model updating: A tutorial," Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing, vol. 25, pp. 2275-2296, 2011.
L. Li, Hu, Y., Wang, X., "Numerical methods for evaluating the sensitivity of element modal strain energy," Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, vol.
64, pp. 13-23, 2013.
D. J. Ewins, Modal Testing: Theory and Practice and Application, Second Edition ed.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000.
R. Fox, Kapoor, MP., "Rates of change of eigenvalues and eigenvectors," AIAA Journal, vol. 6, pp. 2426-2429, 1968.
R. B. Nelson, "Simplified calculation of eigenvector derivatives," AIAA Journal, vol. 14, pp. 1201-1205, 1976.
B. P. Wang, "Improved approximate methods for computing eigenvector derivatives in structural dynamics," AIAA Journal, vol. 29, pp. 1018-1020, 1991.
R. M. Lin, Lim, M.K., Du, H., " Improved inverse eigensensitivity method for structural analytical model updating," Journal of Vibration and Acoustic,
vol. 19, pp. 192-198, 1995.
S. J. Lew, Juang, J.N., "Structural damage detection using virtual passive controller," Control of Dynamics of Structures, vol. 25, pp. 419-424, 2002.
S. S. Rao, The Finite Element Method in Engineering. Amsterdam, Boston, Heidelberg, London, New York, Oxford Paris, San Diego, San Francisco,
Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo: Butterworth-Heinemann publications, 2005.
P. Paultre, Dynamics of Structures: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2010.
A. Rahai, Bakhtiari-Nejad, F., Esfandiari, A., "Damage assessment of structure using incomplete measured mode shapes," Structural Control and Health
Monitoring, vol. 14, pp. 808829, 2007.
W. X. Ren, De Roeck, G., "Structural damage identication using modal data I: simulation verication," Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 128, pp.
87-95, 2001.
Q. W. Yang, "A numerical technique for structural damage detection," Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 215, pp. 2775-2780, 2009.