Method Article

Data Acquisition Protocol for Determining Embedded Sensitivity Functions

DOI:

10.3791/53690

April 20th, 2016

In This Article

Summary

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The data acquisition procedure for determining embedded sensitivity functions is described. Data is acquired and representative results are shown for a residential scale wind turbine blade.

Abstract

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The effectiveness of many structural health monitoring techniques depends on the placement of sensors and the location of input forces. Algorithms for determining optimal sensor and forcing locations typically require data, either simulated or measured, from the damaged structure. Embedded sensitivity functions provide an approach for determining the best available sensor location to detect damage with only data from the healthy structure. In this video and manuscript, the data acquisition procedure and best practices for determining the embedded sensitivity functions of a structure is presented. The frequency response functions used in the calculation of the embedded sensitivity functions are acquired using modal impact testing. Data is acquired and representative results are shown for a residential scale wind turbine blade. Strategies for evaluating the quality of the data being acquired are provided during the demonstration of the data acquisition process.

Introduction

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

Many structural health monitoring techniques rely on changes in measured frequency response functions (FRFs) to detect damage within a structure. However, few of these methods address how to determine sensor placements and/or input force locations that will maximize the effectiveness of the method to detect damage. Embedded sensitivity functions (ESFs) can be used to determine the sensitivity of an FRF to a local change in a structure's material properties. Therefore, because damage typically results in a local change in stiffness, damping, or mass of the structure, ESFs provide a method for determining the best sensor and force locations for FRF-based health monitori....

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Protocol

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

1. Pre-test Preparation

  1. Design and fabricate the test fixture. Design the fixture to replicate realistic boundary conditions by choosing bolt locations to match the mounting locations of the blade. Choose steel for the fixture to minimize the contribution from the fixture to the dynamic response of the test specimen.
    1. Bolt the blade to the custom t-bracket.
    2. Clamp the fixture to a steel table.
  2. Identify and mark grid of impact locations.
    1. Choose 30 points that span the entire blade.
    2. Mark points with a marker or wax pen and number for reference. Measure point spacing using a tape measure for ....

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Results

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

Figure 1 shows a typical embedded sensitivity function. Similar to an FRF, the ESF has peaks near the natural frequencies of the structure. The higher the value of the ESF, the more sensitive the location is to damage between points m and n. Each of the thirty points tested on the wind turbine blade has a unique ESF. These ESFs can be compared to determine which sensor location would be most sensitive to damage. For example, Figure 2 sho.......

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Discussion

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

Test fixtures should be designed to replicate realistic boundary conditions so that results will be applicable under operating conditions. The selection of the number of impact points used for testing is a trade-off between having sufficient spatial resolution and the testing time. Select the hammer based on the size of the test specimen and the frequency range of interest. In general, the smaller the hammer, the broader the frequency range excited. However, smaller hammers typically produce lower amplitude forces. Impac.......

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Disclosures

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The authors have no acknowledgements.

....

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Materials

List of materials used in this article
NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
AccelerometerPCB356B11three used in testing
Impact hammerPCB086C01
Data acquisition cardNI9234
DAQ chasis NIcDAQ-9171or similar
SoftwareMATLAB
Super glueLoctite454
Handheld ShakerPCB394C06for calibration 

References

Loading...
$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
  1. Singh, N., Joshi, M. Optimization of location and number of sensors for structural health monitoring using genetic algorithm. Mater Forum. 33, 359-367 (2009).
  2. Gao, H., Rose, J. Ultrasonic sensor placement optimiza....

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Reprints and Permissions

Request permission to reuse the text or figures of this JoVE article

Request Permission

Tags

Embedded Sensitivity FunctionsFrequency Response FunctionsModal Impact TestingStructural Health MonitoringData Acquisition ProtocolWind Turbine BladeAccelerometer CalibrationImpact Hammer SetupSensor Placement StrategyCoherence Analysis

Related Articles