PSI - Issue 44

Davide Arezzo et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 2098–2105 D. Arezzo et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 000 – 000

2105

8

Furthermore, since dynamic identification tests were performed with a limited number of sensors, a calibrated FEM of the church was developed to support the design of the monitoring system, in order to reduce the significance of the spatial aliasing, which is typical for those cases where the simplifying assumption of rigid floors is not valid. The family of Swarm Intelligence and genetic algorithms, which are becoming increasingly popular for dealing with optimisation problems, revealed suitable for the model updating of complex finite element models. Finally, the Effective Independence method revealed a useful and effective tool to optimise the number of sensors, reducing costs of the monitoring system. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work is part of the ARCH project. ARCH has received funding from the European Union’s Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (Horizon 2020) under grant agreement No 820999. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of University of Camerino and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. References Arezzo, D., Nicoletti, V., Cipriani, L., Carbonari, S., Leoni, G., & Gara, F. (2021). First results of the monitoring of the façade damage mechanism of the “Santa Maria in Via” Church in Camerino following the 2016 Central Italy Earthquake. In: SHMII proceedings10. p. 1-7, Porto, Portugal, 30 June - 2 July 2021. Blum, Christian, & Xiaodong Li. (2008). Swarm Intelligence in Optimization. In Swarm Intelligence: Introduction and Applications, 43 – 85. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74089-6_2. Cancelli, A., Laflamme, S., Alipour, A., Sritharan, S., Ubertini, F. (2020). Vibration-based damage localization and quantification in a pretensioned concrete girder using stochastic subspace identification and particle swarm model updating. Struct. Health Monit., 19(2), pp. 587-605. Civera, M., Pecorelli, M.L., Ceravolo, R., Surace, C., Zanotti Fragonara, L. (2021). A multi-objective genetic algorithm strategy for robust optimal sensor placement. Comput-Aided Civ Inf, 36(9), pp. 1185-1202. Costanzo, A., Falcone, S., D’Alessandro, A., Vitale, G., Giovinazzi, S., Morici, M., Dall’Asta, A., Buongiorno, M.F., 2021. A Technological System for Post-Earthquake Damage Scenarios Based on the Monitoring by Means of an Urban Seismic Network. Sensors 21, 7887. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21237887. Flynn, Eric B., & Michael D. Todd. (2010). A Bayesian approach to optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring with application to active sensing. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 24 (4): 891 – 903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2009.09.003. Guo, H Y, L Zhang, L L Zhang, & J X Zhou. (2004). Optimal placement of sensors for structural health monitoring using improved genetic algorithms. Smart Materials and Structures 13 (3): 528 – 34. https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/13/3/011. Heo, G., M.L. Wang, &D. Satpathi. (1997). Optimal transducer placement for health monitoring of long span bridge. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 16 (7): 495 – 502. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(97)00010-9. Jiang, Y., Li, D., & Song. G., (2017). On the physical significance of the Effective Independence method for sensor placement. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 842: 012030. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/842/1/012030. J. Kennedy & R. Eberhart. (1995). Par ticle Swarm Optimization. In Proceedings of ICNN’95 - International Conference on Neural Networks, 4:1942 – 48 vol.4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968. Kammer, D. (1991). Sensor Placement for On-Orbit Modal Identification and Correlation of Large Space Structures. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. 14. 251 - 259. 10.2514/3.20635. Lenticchia, E., Ceravolo R., Antonaci, P. (2018). Sensor Placement Strategies for the Seismic Monitoring of Complex Vaulted Structures of the Modern Architectural Heritage. Shock Vib., art. numb. 3739690. Li, Binbin, Dongsheng Li, Xuefeng Zhao, & Jinping Ou. (2012). Optimal sensor placement in health monitoring of suspension bridge. Science China Technological Sciences 55 (luglio). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-012-4815-8. Meo, M., & Zumpano. G. (2005). On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure. Engineering Structures 27 (10) : 1488 – 97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.03.015. Morici, M., Canuti, C., Dall’Asta, A., Leoni, G., 2020. Empirical predictive model for seismic damage of historical churches. Bull Earthquake Eng 18, 6015 – 6037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00903-2 Saada, Mohamed M., Mustafa H. Arafa, & Ashraf O. Nassef. (2013). Finite Element Model Updating Approach to Damage Identification in Beams Using Particle Swarm Optimization. Engineering Optimization 45 (6): 677 – 96. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305215X.2012.704026. Tran-Ngoc, H., S. Khatir, G. De Roeck, T. Bui-Tien, L. Nguyen-Ngoc, & M. Abdel Wahab. (2018). Model Updating for Nam O Bridge Using Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm and Genetic Algorithm. Sensors 18 (12). https://doi.org/10.3390/s18124131. Vita le, G., D’Alessandro, A., Di Benedetto, A., Figlioli, A., Costanzo, A., Speciale, S., Piattoni, Q., Cipriani, L., 2022. Urban Seismic Network Based on MEMS Sensors: The Experience of the Seismic Observatory in Camerino (Marche, Italy). Sensors 22, 4335. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124335 Worden, K, & A.P Burrows. (2001). Optimal Sensor Placement for Fault Detection. Engineering Structures 23 (8): 885 – 901. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00118-8. Zacharakis, I., Giagopoulos, D. (2022). Vibration ‐ Based Damage Detection Using Finite Element Modeling and the Metaheuristic Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm. Sensors, 22(14), art. numb. 5079.