Validation of an FE model updating procedure for damage assessment using a modular laboratory experiment with a reversible damage mechanism

Abstract

In this work, the systematic validation of a deterministic finite element (FE) model updating procedure for damage assessment is presented using a self-developed modular laboratory experiment. A fundamental, systematic validation of damage assessment methods is rarely conducted and in many experimental investigations, only one type of defect is introduced at only one position. Often, the damage inserted is irreversible and inspections are only performed visually. Thus, the damage introduced and, with it, the results of the damage assessment method considered are often not entirely analyzed in terms of quantity and quality. To address this shortcoming, a modular steel cantilever beam is designed with nine reversible damage positions and the option to insert different damage scenarios in a controlled manner. The measurement data are made available in open-access form which enables a systematic experimental validation of damage assessment methods. To demonstrate such a systematic validation using the modular laboratory experiment, a deterministic FE model updating procedure previously introduced by the authors is applied and extended. The FE model updating approach uses different parameterized damage distribution functions to update the stiffness properties of the structure considered. The mathematical formulation allows for an updating procedure that is independent of the FE mesh resolution and free of assumptions about the defect location while only needing few design variables. In this work, the FE model updating procedure is based only on eigenfrequency deviations. The results show a precise localization within ±0.05m of the nine different damage positions and a correct relative quantification of the three different damage scenarios considered. With that, first, it is shown that the deterministic FE model updating procedure presented is suitable for precise damage assessment. Second, this work demonstrates that the opportunity to introduce several reversible damage positions and distinctly defined types and severities of damage into the laboratory experiment presented generally enables the systematic experimental validation of damage assessment methods.