Vibration-Based Monitoring of Civil Structures with Subspace-Based Damage Detection

  • Michael Döhler
  • Falk Hille
  • Laurent Mevel
Part of the Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering book series (ISCA, volume 92)


Automatic vibration-based structural health monitoring has been recognized as a useful alternative or addition to visual inspections or local non-destructive testing performed manually. It is, in particular, suitable for mechanical and aeronautical structures as well as on civil structures, including cultural heritage sites. The main challenge is to provide a robust damage diagnosis from the recorded vibration measurements, for which statistical signal processing methods are required. In this chapter, a damage detection method is presented that compares vibration measurements from the current system to a reference state in a hypothesis test, where data-related uncertainties are taken into account. The computation of the test statistic on new measurements is straightforward and does not require a separate modal identification. The performance of the method is firstly shown on a steel frame structure in a laboratory experiment. Secondly, the application on real measurements on S101 Bridge is shown during a progressive damage test, where damage was successfully detected for different damage scenarios.


Subspace methods Damage detection Statistical tests Vibrations Structural health monitoring 



We thank Dr. Helmut Wenzel, VCE, and the FP7 IRIS project for providing the data from S101 Bridge.


  1. 1.
    Balmès E, Basseville M, Bourquin F, Mevel L, Nasser H, Treyssède F (2008) Merging sensor data from multiple temperature scenarios for vibration-based monitoring of civil structures. Struct Health Monitor 7(2):129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balmès E, Basseville M, Mevel L, Nasser H (2009) Handling the temperature effect in vibration-based monitoring of civil structures: a combined subspace-based and nuisance rejection approach. Control Eng Pract 17(1):80–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balmès E, Basseville M, Mevel L, Nasser H, Zhou W (2008) Statistical model-based damage localization: a combined subspace-based and substructuring approach. Struct Control Health Monitor 15(6):857–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Basseville M, Abdelghani M, Benveniste A (2000) Subspace-based fault detection algorithms for vibration monitoring. Automatica 36(1):101–109MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Basseville M, Bourquin F, Mevel L, Nasser H, Treyssède F (2010) Handling the temperature effect in vibration monitoring: two subspace-based analytical approaches. J Eng Mech 136(3):367–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Basseville M, Mevel L, Goursat M (2004) Statistical model-based damage detection and localization: subspace-based residuals and damage-to-noise sensitivity ratios. J Sound Vibration 275(3):769–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bernal D (2013) Kalman filter damage detection in the presence of changing process and measurement noise. Mech Syst Signal Process 39(1–2):361–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brownjohn J, De Stefano A, Xu Y, Wenzel H, Aktan A (2011) Vibration-based monitoring of civil infrastructure: challenges and successes. J Civil Struct Health Monitor 1(3):79–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carden E, Fanning P (2004) Vibration based condition monitoring: a review. Struct Health Monitor 3(4):355–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Döhler M, Hille, F (2014) Subspace-based damage detection on steel frame structure under changing excitation. In: Proceedings of 32nd International Modal Analysis Conference. Orlando, FL, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Döhler M, Hille F, Mevel L, Rücker W (2014) Structural health monitoring with statistical methods during progressive damage test of S101 Bridge. Eng Struct 69:183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Döhler M, Mevel L (2013) Subspace-based fault detection robust to changes in the noise covariances. Automatica 49(9):2734–2743MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Döhler M, Mevel L, Hille F (2014) Subspace-based damage detection under changes in the ambient excitation statistics. Mech Syst Signal Process 45(1):207–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Döhler M, Mevel L, Zhang Q (2016) Fault detection, isolation and quantification from Gaussian residuals with application to structural damage diagnosis. Ann Rev Control 42:244–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fan W, Qiao P (2011) Vibration-based damage identification methods: a review and comparative study. Struct Health Monitor 10(1):83–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Farrar C, Worden K (2007) An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philoso Trans Royal Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 365(1851):303–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hille F, Petryna Y, Rücker W (2014) Subspace-based detection of fatigue damage on a steel frame laboratory structure for offshore applications. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014. Porto, Portugal, July 2014Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juang JN (1994) Applied system identification. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USAMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kullaa J (2003) Damage detection of the Z24 Bridge using control charts. Mech Syst Signal Process 17(1):163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ramos L, Marques L, Lourenço P, De Roeck G, Campos-Costa A, Roque J (2010) Monitoring historical masonry structures with operational modal analysis: two case studies. Mech Syst Signal Process 24(5):1291–1305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rytter A (1993) Vibrational based inspection of civil engineering structures. Ph.D. thesis, Aalborg University, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Structural Vibration Solutions A/S: ARTeMIS modal pro–damage detection plugin (2015).
  23. 23.
    VCE (2009) Progressive damage test S101 Flyover Reibersdorf/draft. Tech. Rep. 08/2308, VCEGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Worden K, Manson G, Fieller N (2000) Damage detection using outlier analysis. JSound Vibr 229(3):647–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yan A, De Boe P, Golinval J (2004) Structural damage diagnosis by Kalman model based on stochastic subspace identification. Struct Health Monitor 3(2):103–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Inria, I4S/IFSTTAR, COSYS, SIIRennesFrance
  2. 2.BAM Federal Institute of Materials Research and TestingBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations