MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610319582 · doi:10.1177/1475921717704626

Application of entropy in identification of breathing cracks in a beam structure: Simulations and experimental studies

2017· article· en· W2610319582 on OpenAlexafffund
Buddhi Wimarshana, Nan Wu, Christine Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Health Monitoring · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsCantileverVibrationStructural engineeringMaterials scienceSample entropyMechanicsTime domainBeam (structure)AcousticsEntropy (arrow of time)PhysicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cantilever beam with a breathing crack is studied to detect the crack and evaluate the crack depth using entropy measures. During the vibration in engineering structures, fatigue cracks undergo the status from close-to-open (and open-to-close) repetitively leading to a crack breathing phenomenon. Entropy is a measure, which can quantify the complexity or irregularity in system dynamics, and hence employed to quantify the bi-linearity/irregularity of the vibration response, which is induced by the breathing phenomenon of a crack. A mathematical model of harmonically excited unit length steel cantilever beam with a breathing crack located near the fixed end is established, and an iterative numerical method is applied to generate accurate time domain vibration responses. The steady-state time domain vibration signals are pre-processed with wavelet transformation, and the bi-linearity/irregularity of the vibration signals due to breathing effect is then successfully quantified using both sample entropy and quantized approximation of sample entropy to detect and estimate the crack depth. It is observed that the method is capable of identifying crack depths even at very early stages of 3% of the beam thickness with significant increment in the entropy values (more than 200%) compared to the healthy beam. In addition, experimental studies are conducted, and the simulation results are in good agreement with the experimental results. The proposed technique can also be applied to damage identification in other types of structures, such as plates and shells.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural Health MonitoringSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207