Wavelet-Based Estimation of Damping from Multi-Sensor, Multi-Impact Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate damping estimation is crucial for structural health monitoring and machinery diagnostics. This article introduces a novel wavelet-based framework for extracting the damping ratio from multiple impulse responses of vibrating systems. Extracting damping ratios is a numerically sensitive task, further complicated by the common assumption in the literature that impacts are perfectly aligned—a condition rarely met in practice. To address the challenge of non-synchronized recordings, we propose two wavelet-based algorithms that leverage wavelet energy for improved alignment and averaging in the wavelet domain to reduce noise, enhancing the robustness of damping estimation. Our approach provides a fresh perspective on the application of wavelets in damping estimation. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation, comparing the proposed methods with four traditional algorithms. The assessment is strengthened by incorporating both numerical simulations and experimental analysis. Additionally, we apply the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test to assess the significance of algorithm performance across varying numbers of recordings. The results highlight the sensitivity of damping estimation to time shifts, noise levels, and the number of recordings. The proposed wavelet-based approaches demonstrate outstanding adaptability and reliability, offering a promising solution for real-world applications.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".