PSI - Issue 64
Vera Rillo et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 64 (2024) 700–707 Rillo et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000
706
7
Fig.4. Optimal configurations with 10 sensors from: a) ADPR, b) EFI, c) EVP ranking
The MAC matrices between the starting configuration with 24 sensors and the optimal configurations with 10 sensors, obtained applying the three OSP methods, referring only to the first three modal shapes, are reported in Fig. 5.
Configuration with 10 sensors Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
MAC matrix
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
0.85 0.02 0.02
0.01 0.86 0.35
0.01 0.28 0.46
a)
Configuration with 24 sensors
Configuration with 10 sensors Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
MAC matrix
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
0.87 0.01 0.01
0.00 0.89 0.42
0.00 0.35 0.90
b)
Configuration with 24 sensors
Configuration with 10 sensors Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
MAC matrix
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
0.89 0.01 0.00
0.01 0.90 0.44
0.00 0.38 0.90
c)
Configuration with 24 sensors
Fig. 5. MAC matrices between the starting configuration with 24 sensors and the optimal configuration with 10 sensors obtained by: a) ADPR, b) EFI and c) EVP ranking. As can been seen from Fig. 5 the best sensors configuration able to capture the first three modes of vibration with a MAC value greater than 0.8 is the one related to the EVP ranking. In Fig. 6, a plan view of the bridge with the sensor locations, obtained by the EVP ranking, that will be used for the monitoring of the bridge, is highlighted.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Proposal Maker