Detecting Multiple Damages in UHPFRC Beams through Modal Curvature Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Curvature-based damage detection has been previously applied to identify damage in concrete structures, but little attention has been given to the capacity of this method to identify distributed damage in multiple damage zones. This study aims to apply for the first time an enhanced existing method based on modal curvature analysis combined with wavelet transform curvature (WTC) to identify zones and highlight the damage zones of a beam made of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), a construction material that is emerging worldwide for its outstanding performance and durability. First, three beams with a 2 m span of UHPFRC material were cast, and damaged zones were created by sawing. A reference beam without cracks was also cast. The free vibration responses were measured by 12 accelerometers and calculated by operational modal analysis. Moreover, for the sake of comparison, a finite element model (FEM) was also applied to two identical beams to generate numerical acceleration without noise. Second, the modal curvature was calculated for different modes for both experimental and FEM-simulated acceleration after applying cubic spline interpolation. Finally, two damage identification methods were considered: (i) the damage index (DI), based on averaging the quadratic difference of the local curvature with respect to the reference beam, and (ii) the WTC method, applied to the quadratic difference of the local curvature with respect the reference beam. The results indicate that the developed coupled modal curvature WTC method can better identify the damaged zones of UHPFRC beams.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".