time structure health monitoring by nonlinearity degree ...2. structural health monitoring system...
TRANSCRIPT
9th
European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring
July 10-13, 2018, Manchester, United Kingdom
Creative Commons CC-BY-NC licence https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Real-time Structure Health Monitoring by Nonlinearity Degree Analysis based on Hilbert-Huang Transform
Chun-Yueh Hsieh 1
, Alain Sawadogo 2 and Tzu-Kang Lin
3
1 National Chiao Tung University, Department of Civil Engineering, Hsinchu, Taiwan,
2 National Chiao Tung University, Department of Civil Engineering, Hsinchu, Taiwan,
3. National Chiao Tung University, Department of Civil Engineering Hsinchu, Taiwan,
Abstract
The fact that in recent years many catastrophic seismic events are major factors in
building collapse has made structure health monitoring an important research topic. In
view of the complex nonlinear behaviour of building structure/soil interactions, the
fundamental frequency may gradually change due to seismic damage. To provide real-
time structural dynamic parameters, Hilbert-Huang Transform (HHT) is utilize to
analyse the measured signal from the superstructure under seismic excitation. In the
study, the Time-Frequency domain Amplification Function (T.F.AF) obtained from the
HHT analysis is decomposed into instantaneous frequency width, centroid of frequency
and energy time-history. The proposed degree of nonlinearity (DN) can then be
estimated to display the structure health condition. In order to verify the proposed
method, shaking table tests were conducted on a 6 -story benchmark structure.
According to the analysis of vibration signals recorded up to the time of collapse,
structure behaviour variation can be rapidly displayed by the degree of nonlinearity to
reflect the health condition of the whole structure
1. Introduction
Taiwan is located at the junction of the Eurasian continental plate and the Philippine Sea
Plate, these movements has caused frequent earthquakes. Large-scale earthquakes
damages the country propriety but more importantly it harms people live. Earthquakes
has a great impact on Taiwan, it instantaneously transmits powerful energy to structures,
and buildings has to rely on their structural system to dissipate the external forces. If
energy cannot be dissipated effectively, structural damage will easily occur, and in
severe cases, the collapse of the structure itself may imply potential loss of lives.
Therefore, the dynamic behaviour of the structure must be studied in depth when the
structure is affected by external forces such as seismic forces. Following the empirical
mode decomposition method and the Hilbert spectrum for non-stationary time series
analysis in 1998 (1), this study introduced a structural dynamic parameter named the
“degree of nonlinearity” to observe the structure behaviour using a new structural
dynamic parameter.
Mor
e in
fo a
bout
this
art
icle
: ht
tp://
ww
w.n
dt.n
et/?
id=
2338
7
2
2. Structural Health Monitoring System
2.1 Instantaneous Frequency
Traditionally, Fourier spectrum uses sine and cosine harmonic functions as the basis
with a fixed amplitude. In reality there is a problem of time-variation, due to limited
applicability of the Fast Fourier transform, but it is impossible to obtain the
instantaneous frequency (IF) at any time wanted. For the structure affected by
earthquakes, understanding the variation of the frequency is a necessity. Hilbert
Transform is widely used for non-linear and non-stationary cases, making time varying
signal easier to analyse. The actual signal is expressed in form of a complex number to
determine the instantaneous amplitude a(t) and instantaneous phase θ(t). The
instantaneous frequency ω(t) can then be determined. For any time series, the Hilbert
transformation formula Y(t) can be expressed as:
1 XY t P d
t
(1)
where P represent the Cauchy principal value.
The Hilbert transformation can be defined as the convolution between X(t) and 1/t after
combining X(t) and Y(t) into a conjugate complex number it gives an analytic signal Z(t):
( )( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) i t
Z t X t iY t a t e (2)
Such as:
2 2( ) ( ) ( )a t X t Y t (3)
1( ) tan ( )/ ( )t Y t X t (4)
( ) ( )/t d t dt (5)
According to the analysis, the amplitude time frequency distribution of the time series
are obtained.
2.2 Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD)
EMD does not predetermine the basis function compared to others decomposition
methods. The basis function is directly obtained from the signal data, and has great
adaptability. EMD decompose the original signal into a finite number of instantaneous
modal frequency (IMF), which are approximate single component signals with zero-
mean amplitude modulation, and a finite number of IMFs from high frequencies to low
frequencies can be obtained until only a monotonic function remains at the end (trend).
The original data can be regarded as the sum of all IMFs and trends if during the
analysis the time difference between the extremes values represents the time scalar of
the intrawave (5), it provides optimal vibration modal resolution and can be applied to
non-zero mean values as well as non-zero-crossing data.
3
Thus, the original signal can be re-expressed as:
1
n
i n
i
X t c r
(6)
2.3 Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition (EEMD)
EMD is often used as a signal disassembly tool (4). When signals of different scales are
mixed together, it disassembles them into different IMF’s but a defective point has been
discovered named “mode mixing”. During the process of EMD, a low amplitude
oscillation or an intermittent signal may exist in several different IMFs, such as a one
modal component decomposed into different IMF components, or a single IMF
containing two different modal signals, resulting to a “mode mixing” within the IMF.
When EMD is performed, a white noise wi(t) signal with a limited amplitude is added to
the original signal X(t), thus this signal becomes as follow:
( )i i
X t X t w t (7)
2.4 Hilbert Spectrum
2.4.1 Hilbert Spectrum Analysis
After decomposing the signal using EMD, each component of the IMF can be obtained.
From equation (8), the IMF component can be converted from a time domain to a
frequency domain; this process is called Hilbert Spectrum Analysis (HSA):
1
n
j j
j
X a t exp i tt dt
(8)
Although the Hilbert transformation can deal with monotonous trends and take it as part
of a longer amplitude, the remaining energy may be too strong, considering the
uncertainties of longer-term trends, and other low energy and information contained in
high frequency component. The above formula gives a time function for each amplitude
and frequency components, which is expanded by a Fourier expression:
1
ji t
j
j
X a et
(9)
a j and wj are constants. After comparing equations (8) and (9), the IMF represents a
generalized Fourier expansion. Variables within the amplitude and the instantaneous
frequency can not only improve the expansion, but also make it applicable for unsteady
signals. In terms of the expansion of the IMF, the amplitude and the frequency
modulation are clearly separated. The time function amplitude and the instantaneous
frequency are represented as the frequency spectrum of the time-frequency-amplitude,
and is referred to as the Hilbert Amplitude spectrum (HAS).
2.4.2 Time-Frequency domain Amplification Function (TFAF)
4
Two different types of amplification function exist within the TFAF. The Amplification
Function Magnitude (AFM) is mainly used to observe the distribution of “energy” and
the Amplification Function Frequency (AFF) is used to observe the distribution of
“frequency” both in the Hilbert energy spectrum. It represents the relationship of the
shock wave propagation through the structure to obtain the amplifying characteristics of
it.
Roof
Fundation
R fAF Str f
R f (10)
AF represents the amplification function, RRoof is the response of the structural roof and
RFundation is the response of the structural foundation. The dynamic response Str of the
structure is obtained by dividing the structure roof response with the basis response. In
which the time frequency domain amplification function AFM shows the transmission
of seismic waves from the underground foundation to the building roof, and the energy
amplification relationship of the seismic waves during the process. TFAF analysis is
performed with the signals recorded at the seismic wave input and output location on
the structure. The original signal X(t)Fundation is recorded from the seismic wave applied
at the base of the structure. The seismic wave output data X(t)Roof represents the original
signal recorded on the roof of the structure. After analysing those two signals via the
Hilbert energy spectrum, the time frequency spectrum can be written as H{X(t)Fundation}
and H{X(t)roof} respectively. The time-frequency domain amplification function AFM
can also be defined as followed:
. .
Roof
Fundation
H X tHSP RoofAF m
HSP Fundation H X t (11)
The time frequency domain amplification function AFF can also be used when the
structure is subjected to an earthquake. Obtained by normalizing the energy of the AFM,
this procedure alleviates the variation of energy within the AFM, leaving only the
variation of instantaneous frequency as AFF:
. . . .AF f NS AF m (12)
where NS represents the normalization of energy. In the frequency region, each signals
has their own weighting number (between 0 and 1). The higher weight represents the
main frequency at that particular moment.
2.5 Degree of nonlinearity
According to linear algebra, the degree of nonlinearity is based on the relationship
between input and output. Two methods where used to calculate the degree of
nonlinearity, including the calculation of the degree of nonlinearity (DN1) expressed as:
1
z z
z z
IF IF aDN
IF a
(13)
5
Steps to obtain the degree of nonlinearity are shown in figure 1, in which the peak value
of the energy distribution at each time in the time-frequency domain amplification
function AFF are found to calculate ”IF-IFz“ as well as the frequency energy centre of
gravity at that moment ”IFz” (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Degree of nonlinearity calculation process
Figure 2. Centroid of main instantaneous frequency
From the time-frequency domain amplification function AFM, the time history energy
az is obtained and the average energy āz is calculated. DN1 is a dimensionless structural
dynamic parameter suitable to observe the maximum value of the degree of nonlinearity.
In addition another conservative method is provided to calculate the degree of
nonlinearity DN2 (2):
2
( )
mean( )
z
z
std IFDN
IF (14)
The numerator and denominator represents the standard deviation and the average
within the same part of a time history IFz respectively. Thus the degree of nonlinearity
is calculated from the oscillating amplitude of the main frequency.
3. Benchmark shaking table test
The test model (Figure 3) is composed of a five-story steel structure and a four-story
steel structure connected on the first floor. Starting from the second floor the structures
are separated and two different braces with different characteristics were used to
6
simulate the normal and weak floors. Two earthquakes data TCU071 400 gal and
TCU071 600 gal were applied. It was clearly observed that brace 1 of Frame A slightly
buckled (Figure 4. (a)(b)).
Figure 3. Structure Model
(Right side: Frame A,Left side: Frame B)
(a) TCU071 400 gal (b) TCU071 600 gal
Figure 4. Weak floors of the benchmark test
4. Health monitoring validation
4.1 Time-Frequency domain Amplification Function, TFAF (Frame A)
Figure 5 (a,b) shows the response of the benchmark structure under the TCU071-200
gal where the peak frequency margin 4.2Hz is visible on the AFM. Peak values are
located at 15 second, 17 second, 20 second, and 27 second on the AFF. Figure 5 (c,d)
shows the response of the benchmark structure under the TCU071-400. From figure 5 (c)
AFM, the reaction energy has fallen from 4Hz to 2Hz and the marginal spectral energy
peaks at 10 seconds. After normalizing the energy, figure 5 (d) shows that the dominant
frequency dropped to 2Hz at 10 seconds, and slowly increased to 3Hz. This behaviour is
typical on a nonlinear system, because part of the structure enters the yielding phase.
Figure 5 (e,f) shows the response under TCU071-600 gal, the main frequency of the
structure drops to around 1.9Hz. Figure 5 (f) shows that the main frequency of the
structure drops from about 2.5Hz to 1.5Hz and slowly increased to 2Hz. Figure 5 (g,h)
shows the response under TCU071-800 gal. Figure 5 (h) shows that the main frequency
7
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFf-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400-200
0200400600800
Event date= Case4-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-200
0
200
Event date= Case4-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 50 100 150 2000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20
40
60
80
100M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFf-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-500
0
500
Event date= Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400
-200
0
200
Event date= Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 100 200 3000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20
40
60
80
100
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFf-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400-200
0200400600
Event date= Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-500
0
500
Event date= Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 100 200 3000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20
40
60
80
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFf-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70-400
-200
0
200
400
Event date= Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-100
0
100
Event date= Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 50 1000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20
40
60
80
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
drops under 2Hz, thus the structure is severely damaged and the frequency cannot be
restored.
(a) TFAF (AFM) (b) TFAF (AFF)
(TCU071-200gal) (TCU071-200gal)
(c) TFAF (AFM) (d) TFAF (AFF)
(TCU071-400gal) (TCU071-400gal)
(e) TFAF (AFM) (f) TFAF (AFF)
(TCU071-600gal) (TCU071-600gal)
(g) TFAF (AFM) (h) TFAF (AFF)
(TCU071-800gal) (TCU071-800gal)
Figure 5. TFAF (AFM) and (AFF)
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFm-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
10
20
30
40
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70-400
-200
0
200
400
Event date= Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-100
0
100
Event date= Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 1 2 3 4
x 104
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
x 104
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFm-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
5
10
15
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400-200
0200400600800
Event date= Case4-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-200
0
200
Event date= Case4-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 2000 40000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
x 104
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFm-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
5
10
15
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-500
0
500
Event date= Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400
-200
0
200
Event date= Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 2000 4000 60000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
x 104
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
Fre
q(H
z)
AX5ab -T.F.AF: AFm-Hilbert Spectrum--add 0.001(HSPmax)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
5
10
UP Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
DOWN Original HSP
Fre
q(h
z)
Time(sec)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-400-200
0200400600
Event date= Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,UP Acc data: --AX5ab,dir-X
gal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-500
0
500
Event date= Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz ,DOWN Acc data: --AX0-1,dir-X
gal
0 1000 20000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8M.S-F
Fre
q(h
z)
Amp
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
M.S-T
Am
p
100
0
2
4
6
8M.S-F
Amp(log)
Fre
q(h
z)
up
dow n
8
4.2 Main frequency width, main frequency width variation and main frequency
centroid (Frame A)
Frame A affected by the earthquake TCU 071 with different PGA’s gave different
results, the main frequency recovery sometimes occurs in the second half, TCU 071
main frequency is taken as the main vibration interval from 0 to 29 seconds. Figure 6 (a)
shows the response of the structure subjected to TCU071-200 gal with a main frequency
centroid average of 4.11Hz. Figure 6 (b) shows the response of the model subjected to
TCU071-400 gal the main frequency centroid average decreases from 4.35 Hz to
3.02Hz. Figure 6 (c) shows the response of the model subjected to TCU071-600 gal.
From 3Hz, the main frequency of the structure started oscillating at around 7 seconds,
and decay to 2Hz. After 12 seconds, the main frequency of the structure stabilized at
around 2Hz. Figure 6 (d) shows the response of the model subjected to TCU071-800 gal.
The main frequency of the structure starts at 1.3Hz, at the 5th second it decreased to
2.93Hz, and then drops below 2Hz. After that, it stabilized at around 1.5Hz.
(a). Frequency width, width change, (b). Frequency width, width change,
and centroid for Frame A (TCU071 200 gal) and centroid for Frame A (TCU071 400 gal)
(c). Frequency width, width change, (d). Frequency width, width change,
and centroid for Frame A (TCU071 600 gal) and centroid for Frame A (TCU071 800 gal)
Figure 6. Frequency width, width change, and centroid for Frame A (TCU071 600 gal)
4.3 Degree of nonlinearity (Frame A)
The degree of nonlinearity of the structure subjected to TCU071 seismic data is shown
in figure 7 the peak reaches 1.83 for TC071-200 gal. As shown in figure 8, the structure
frequency changed significantly for TCU071-400 gal. The degree of nonlinearity peak
reaches 7.92. In figure 9 the peak value has reached 11.11 for TCU071-600 gal. From
figure 10 the peak value decreased to 2.69 for TCU071-800 gal. The results of TCU071
time history for different PGA’s shows that when the structure becomes unstable, the
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
time(sec)
Hz
Frequency width from Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4Frequency width variation from Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
time(sec)
Hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8Frequency centroid Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz 0~29sec mean =4.112 std =0.75894
time(sec)
Hz
outside 50% peak left
inside 50% peak left
peak value
inside 50% peak right
outside 50% peak right0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
4
6
8
time(sec)
Hz
Frequency width from Case2-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6Frequency width variation from Case2-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
time(sec)
Hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8Frequency centroid Case2-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz 0~29sec mean =3.0696 std =0.8928
time(sec)
Hz
outside 50% peak left
inside 50% peak left
peak value
inside 50% peak right
outside 50% peak right
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
time(sec)
Hz
Frequency width from Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3Frequency width variation from Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
time(sec)
Hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8Frequency centroid Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz 0~29sec mean =2.1463 std =0.64104
time(sec)
Hz
outside 50% peak left
inside 50% peak left
peak value
inside 50% peak right
outside 50% peak right
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
time(sec)
Hz
Frequency width from Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4Frequency width variation from Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz
time(sec)
Hz
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8Frequency centroid Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz 0~29sec mean =1.5868 std =0.51901
time(sec)
Hz
outside 50% peak left
inside 50% peak left
peak value
inside 50% peak right
outside 50% peak right
9
degree of nonlinearity DN1 rises. After failure, the degree of nonlinearity DN1 decreases
again.
Figure 7. Degree of nonlinearity DN1 for Frame A (TCU071 200 gal)
Figure 8. Degree of nonlinearity DN1 for Frame A (TCU071 400 gal)
Figure 9. Degree of nonlinearity DN1 for Frame A (TCU071 600 gal)
Figure 10. Degree of nonlinearity DN1 for Frame A (TCU071 800 gal)
Figure 11 shows the results after the structure was subjected to TCU071 seismic data.
The trend of the structural frequency declines and the maximum value of the degree of
nonlinearity occurs at TCU071-600 gal. In addition, it can be seen in figure 11 that the
acceleration at the top layer does not amplify the acceleration for TCU071-800 and
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2Degree of nonlinearity Case2-TCU071-200-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz max =1.8261 mean =0.16871 std =0.23301
time(sec)
No
nlin
eari
ty(H
z/H
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8Degree of nonlinearity Case2-TCU071-400-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz max =7.9152 mean =0.37074 std =0.78487
time(sec)
No
nlin
eari
ty(H
z/H
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
2
4
6
8
10
12Degree of nonlinearity Case2-TCU071-600-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz max =11.1119 mean =0.40411 std =0.9474
time(sec)
No
nlin
eari
ty(H
z/H
z)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3Degree of nonlinearity Case2-TCU071-800-AX5ab-AX0-1pair-0-8hz max =2.6914 mean =0.29394 std =0.44682
time(sec)
No
nlin
eari
ty(H
z/H
z)
10
1000 gal. This effect is due to the main frequency of the structure dropping to about
1.5Hz, which is lower than the main frequency band of seismic energy of 2.7Hz. Table
1 and table 2 compare the frequency-centred centroid and PFA of Frame A. As shown
in figure 12 it, appears that DN2 has a trend of structural damage causing DN2 to rise,
which is the biggest difference from the result of DN1. It is notable that the frequency
result of DN2 appears to cross with each other in TCU071.
Figure 11. DN1; Structure frequency, Figure 12. DN2; Structure frequency
PFA comparison chart for Frame A (TCU071) PFA comparison chart for Frame A (TCU071)
Table 1. Frame A, First experiment Degree of nonlinearity 1, Structure frequency, PFA comparison
chart (TCU071)
Frame A
TCU071 Peak of DN1
Mean of
DN1
Mean of Frequency
Centroid (Hz)
Peak Floor
Acceleration(g)
50 gal 2.416 0.206 4.247 0.154
200 gal 1.826 0.169 4.112 0.572
400 gal 7.915 0.371 3.070 0.998
600 gal 11.112 0.404 2.146 1.015
800 gal 2.691 0.294 1.587 0.720
1000 gal 3.826 0.281 1.504 0.413
Table 2. Frame A, First experiment Degree of nonlinearity 2, Structure frequency, PFA comparison
chart (TCU071)
Frame A
TCU071
Mean of Frequency
Centroid (Hz)
Std. of Frequency
Centroid (Hz) DN2
Peak Floor
Acceleration(g)
50 gal 4.247 0.474 0.173 0.154
200 gal 4.112 0.474 0.185 0.572
400 gal 3.070 0.414 0.291 0.998
600 gal 2.146 0.473 0.299 1.015
800 gal 1.587 0.277 0.327 0.720
1000 gal 1.504 0.486 0.277 0.413
11
5. Conclusion
This study applies the time-frequency domain amplification function based on Hilbert-
Huang transform for structural health monitoring. It uses the changes of the main
frequency width of the structure, the main frequency centroid, and the structural energy
for the calculation, and the degree of nonlinearity is proposed. Furthermore, Hilbert-
Huang transform analyse the structure signal and obtains the dynamic characteristics of
the structure under the influence of earthquakes. Thus, the variation of energy,
frequency and time of the Hilbert energy spectrum with the time-frequency domain
amplification function helps to further understand that the structure is affected by the
structural degradation during earthquakes. By observing the changes of the main
frequency, the degree of nonlinearity and the peak response of the structure acceleration
an unstable state of the structure can be easily identified. In this study, the proposed
method for accelerating signal measured on a shaking table test demonstrate the
importance and effectiveness of the new time-frequency dynamic parameter the “degree
of nonlinearity”. Based on the analysis results obtained from the structural experiment,
both degree of nonlinearity parameters can be used for early warning of possible
structural damage.
References
1. Huang, N. E., Shen, Z., Long, S. R., Wu, M. C., Shih, S. H., Zheng, Q., Tung, C. C.
and Liu, H. H. “The empirical mode decomposition method and the Hilbert spectrum for non-stationary time series analysis”, Proc. Roy. Soc. London, A454,
903-995, p 2, 1998.
2. Su Sheng Chung, The Hilbert-Huang Transformation Structural Health
Monitoring method for Structure Strong Motion Records ,National Central
University Department of Civil Engineering Graduate School, PhD thesis, pp 4-6,
2015.
3. Huang, N. E., M. T. Lo, Z. H. Wu, and X. Y. Chen, “Method for Quantifying and Modeling Degree of Nonlinearity, Combined Nonlinearity and Nonstationarity”, United States Patent Application, Pub. No. US 20130080378A1, p 5, 2013.
4. Wu Z. and Huang N. E., “Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition: a noise-
assisted data analysis method”, Centre for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies, Tech.
Rep., No.173, p 3, 2004.
5. Dazin, P. G., “Nonlinear Systems,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.