Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Dynamic reduction-based structural damage detection of transmission tower

utilizing ambient vibration data
T. Yin a , H.F. Lam a, , H.M. Chow a , H.P. Zhu b
a
Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
b
School of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430074, China

article info abstract

Article history: This paper reports a feasibility study of utilizing ambient vibration data measured from a limited
Received 3 September 2008 number of sensors in the structural damage detection of transmission towers, which are large-scaled
Received in revised form three-dimensional spatial structures. To develop a practical and efficient structural damage detection
6 March 2009
methodology, the characteristics of transmission towers are considered in the development stage,
Accepted 6 March 2009
Available online 5 April 2009
including the most common types of damage, accessible locations for installing sensors, the technique
needed to identify a reliable set of modal parameters utilizing ambient vibration data, a method to
Keywords:
divide the transmission tower into sub-structures for structural damage detection, a way to formulate
Structural damage detection the damage detection problem, and the corresponding solution method. The proposed methodology is
Model reduction numerically verified by simulated noisy data from a three-dimensional transmission tower sample under
Ambient vibration both single and multiple damage cases. Very encouraging results are obtained, showing that the proposed
Transmission tower methodology can identify the damaged sub-structure by estimating the equivalent stiffness reduction
even in the presence of both measurement noise and modeling error.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Vibration-based damage detection approaches have received

Innumerable telecommunication and electrical power trans-
mission steel towers have been constructed around the world.
These towers have been used to support transmission antennas
or enable electrical power transmission lines to be built, intercon-
necting vast territories, which has contributed enormously to the
development of national economies and societies. However, trans-
mission towers tend to be sensitive to wind action. The collapse
of transmission towers due to continuously accumulated damage
is not uncommon, especially after typhoons and earthquakes. This
has led to a growing interest in the structural safety and reliabil-
ity of transmission towers [1,2]. Many studies have been focused
on the vibration behavior of transmission towers under wind ac-
tion [24] and seismic ground motion [5], but the assessment of
the health status of this type of structure is seldom emphasized
in the literature. In the traditional design of transmission towers,
secondary braces are usually neglected to simplify the analysis.
As this does not match with the exact structural characteristics
of transmission towers, the model cannot reflect the load paths of
the real structure. Therefore, continuous monitoring of the struc-
tural health status of transmission towers becomes especially im-
portant.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 2788 7303; fax: +852 2788 7612.
E-mail address: paullam@cityu.edu.hk (H.F. Lam).
0141-0296/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.03.004
much attention in the past few decades, and various methodologies
have been proposed [6,7]. Most of the methods in the literature
have been verified by very simple structural systems, such as two-
dimensional trusses [8], beams [9,10], plates [11,12], and shear
building models [13,14]. This has mainly occurred because most
methods require knowledge of the external excitation, closely
spaced sensors, or repetition of the forward analysis process many
times (i.e., they are computationally demanding). These methods
are either not applicable or not practical for the damage detection
of large-scale three-dimensional structures such as transmission
towers or suspen-dome structures [15] with numerous members
and connections.
For large-scale structures, the identification of modal parame-
ters (i.e., the natural frequencies and mode shapes) under ambient
vibration itself is already a difficult task [1618]. The natural exci-
tation technique (NExT) [19,20] reveals that the cross-correlation
function between two responses measured on an ambient-excited
structure has the same analytical form as the impulse response:
i.e., it is the free vibration response of the structure, which pro-
vides significant help with the problem of modal parameter iden-
tification from ambient vibration data. When it is employed in
conjunction with the eigensystem realization algorithm (ERA) [21],
it forms an efficient method for identifying the modal parameters
of the first few modes utilizing ambient vibration data.
One of the main difficulties in structural damage detection in
real situations is the limited number of sensors. As a result, the
2010 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019

number of the measured degrees of freedom (DOFs) is usually
much smaller than the number of DOFs of the finite element (FE)
model, especially for large-scaled three-dimensional structures
such as transmission towers. In such situations, mode shape
expansion techniques, which expand the experimental mode
shapes to fit those from the FE model [22], or model reduction
techniques, which condense the FE model so that the calculated
mode shapes fit the measured mode shapes, must be employed.
Many researchers have revealed that the expansion process
aggregates the effects of modeling error, experimental noise,
and other uncertainties to the resultant mode shapes [23,24],
which significantly affects the results of damage detection. Model
reduction techniques were originally developed to reduce the
computational time for large FE models. Representative methods
are the static or Guyan reduction method [25], the improved
reduced system (IRS) method [26], and the dynamic-reduction
method [27]. As the inertia effect is not considered in the classical
Guyan reduction, the error between the reduced and original
models would be remarkable when the mass of the discarded DOF
is not minor. The IRS method is modified from the Guyan method
with a term added to allow for certain inertia effects. Unlike the
Guyan and IRS methods, the dynamic-reduction method does not
introduce any error in the transformation process within a certain
frequency range.
All of the aforementioned model-reduction techniques have
been used in experimental modal analysis and model updating in
the past few decades [24,28,29]. However, research work related
to combining this technique with a structural damage detection
method is rare, mainly because information about the damage and
connectivity of the original full model may be lost or destroyed
during the condensation process [29]. As a more accurate reduced
model can be obtained by the dynamic-reduction method, it is
possible for the reduced model to retain the damage information
from the original model. Therefore, one of the objectives of the
proposed method is to extend the dynamic-reduction method [27]
to structural damage detection on transmission towers with a
limited number of sensors.
2. The proposed methodology
significance. The proposed methodology focuses on identifying the
damaged secondary members of the target transmission tower
with a limited number of sensors.
The proposed methodology includes two phases. In phase I,
the modal parameters, such as natural frequencies and mode
shapes, of the healthy (undamaged) and damaged states of the
transmission tower are identified from the corresponding sets of
measured ambient vibration data using the NExTERA technique.
The identified modal parameters are used in phase II to estimate
the damage-induced changes in stiffness of the sub-structures of
the target transmission tower via the proposed dynamic reduction
based damage-detection method.
2.1. Phase I: Modal identification utilizing ambient vibration data
A combination of the NExT [19,20] and ERA [21] methods is
adopted in this paper for ambient data analysis of the transmission
tower to extract the modal parameters. The basic procedure is as
follows. First, an appropriate reference channel for determining
the correlation function is selected for the NExT method. This
is based on the principle that none of the modes should have
nodal points at the reference DOF on the transmission tower,
indicating that all modes contribute to this response [34]. Second,
the cross-correlation functions between the reference channel
and other channels are calculated. Under ambient vibration, these
cross-correlation functions have the same characteristics as the
free vibration response of the structure. By making use of this
phenomenon, the ERA method is finally used to estimate the modal
parameters of the transmission tower.
To ensure that this paper is self-contained, the basic theory of
both NExT and ERA methods will be briefly reviewed. Interested
readers are directed to Refs. [1921] for the detailed formulations.
Assuming the response at location i, xki (t ), which is caused by an
input force fk (t ) at location k, can be represented as
n
X Z t
xki (t ) = ir kr fk ( )g r (t )d (1)
r =1
where g r (t ) = 1/(mr Dr )e 0 t sin(Dr t ) is the impulse response
r r

function associated with mode r, Dr = 0r (1 ( r )2 ) is the

p
It would be impractical to develop a general damage-detection
method applicable to all types of structural systems (e.g., bridges, ith damped modal frequency, and n is the number of modes. ir is
buildings, and towers) with any structural form (e.g., frames the ith component of the rth mode shape. If fk ( ) is a Dirac delta
and trusses), any construction materials (e.g., reinforced concrete, function at = 0, then the response at location i resulting from
steel, or composite), and any types of damage (e.g., material the impulse at location k can be given as
degradation, the formation of plastic joints, and the buckling of
structural members). To develop a robust and efficient damage-
X n
ir kr r r t
xki (t ) = r r
e 0 sin( t ).
r
D (2)
detection method for real structures, the characteristics of the r =1
m D
target structure and damage type must be considered in the
development stage. It is the main objective of this paper to If fk (t ) is a white noise random input
 force at location k, the
put forward a damage-detection methodology that is designed cross-correlation function Rkij (T ) = E xki (t + T )xkj (t ) relating
specifically for transmission towers. two measured responses at location i and j caused by fk (t ) can be
The buckling of secondary members (bracings) is the most expressed as
common type of damage to transmission and communication n X
X n Z t Z t +T
towers, especially after typhoons and earthquakes. The buckled Rkij (T ) = ir kr js ks g r (t + T )g s (t )
members, however, are usually of the same appearance as r =1 s =1
normal members. In such situations, it is very difficult if not
E {fk ( )fk ( )} d d . (3)
impossible for inspectors to identify the damaged members
by visual inspection alone. This is one of the most important As shown in Refs. [19,20], the cross-correlation function Rkij (T )
problems for tower maintenance. Much research has been carried can be further simplified as
to increase the buckling resistance of structural members of
n
transmission towers [3033]. These methods are very good at
Arijk e 0 T sin(Dr T + r )
r r
X
Rkij (T ) = (4)
reducing the probability of secondary member buckling, but do not
r =1
completely eliminate the problem. A practical structural damage
detection method for identifying the buckled (i.e., damaged) where Arijk , being independent of T , is the function of only the modal
secondary members of transmission towers would be of particular parameters, and r is a phase angle. A comparison of Eqs. (2) and
 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019 2011

(4) shows that the cross-correlation functions between two re- system, where fj is the jth natural frequency in Hz, for j =
sponse measurements obtained from an unknown white noise ex- 1, 2, . . . , Nt , and Nt is the total number of measured modes. j is
citation will have the same analytical form as the impulse response the jth eigen-vector. Ki is the contribution of the ith sub-structure
function [19,20]. Although only displacement responses are con- in the global stiffness matrix, for i = 1, 2, . . . , N . i (the ith
sidered in the above derivation, the cross-correlation functions for element in ) is the non-dimensional parameter representing the
acceleration responses exhibit the same characteristic [34,35]. This damage status of the ith sub-structure, Ki . N is the number of
result is important because acceleration responses are much eas- unknown parameters to be identified in the damage-detection
ier to measure than displacement responses for civil engineering process. When the ith sub-structure is undamaged, i takes a value
structures [34]. of zero. When any one of the members of the sub-structure is
Once the cross-correlation functions are obtained by the NExT
damaged, this parameter shows the equivalent damage extent
method, the ERA method can be used to estimate the modal
of the sub-structure. Consider a simple case in which only two
parameters. The ERA method relies on the concept of minimum
structural members are grouped into the ith sub-structure
realization, which identifies a system model with the smallest state
dimension that holds an equivalent relationship of inputoutput
i Ki = i Kj + Kk = j Kj + k Kk


(10)
as the real system [18], and it is very effective for the identification
of lightly damped structures and applicable to multi-input/multi-
where Kj and Kk represent the contribution of the jth and kth
output (MIMO) systems [34]. One of the most important elements
members to the global system stiffness matrix of the structural
in the ERA method is the Hankel matrix, which can be expressed
system, and j and k are the corresponding nondimensional
as follows:
parameters. It must be pointed out that the proposed damage
Yk Yk+1 Yk+q1 detection focuses on calculating i , but not j and k . Therefore,

Yk+1 Yk+2 Yk+q the estimated quantity is the equivalent damage extent of the
H(k 1) =

.. .. .. .. (5) sub-structure but not the exact stiffness reduction of the individual

. . . .

members. For example, if both members are damaged with a 50%
Yk+p1 Yk+p+1 Yk+p+q2
reduction in stiffness (j = k = 0.5), the equivalent stiffness
where Yk is the nd -dimensional free response vector at the kth reduction of the sub-structure will happen to be the same as the
sample interval. The parameters p and q correspond to the number damage extent of each member (i.e., i = 0.5). However, if only one
of rows and columns in the Hankel matrix. These two parameters of the two members is damaged with 50% reduction in stiffness, the
should be chosen so that the rank of H(k 1) is not smaller than calculated equivalent stiffness reduction of the sub-structure is
ns (i.e., the system order). In practice, the suggested value of q is not 50%, but depends on the relative stiffness of the two members.
approximately ten times the number of modes, and p is 2 to 3 times Substituting Eq. (9) into Eq. (8) yields
of q [21].
Performing singular value decomposition (SVD) of H(0) leads to N
X
!
K i K i
j = j Mj . (11)
H(0) = U6VT (6)
i =1
where U and VT are the matrices of the left and right eigenvectors of
In the following formulation, the measured (or master) DOFs
H(0), respectively. 6 is the singular matrix. The rank of the Hankel
matrix is selected by retaining the m largest singular values, and are denoted by the subscript m, while the unmeasured (or slave)
the three reduced matrices, Um , 6m , and Vm , are obtained. Thus, the DOFs are denoted by the subscript s. The transformation matrix P
estimated state and output matrices of the original discrete linear can be formed, where PPT = IN , and IN is a N-dimensional identity
dynamical system can be expressed as matrix. Pre-multiplying the transpose of the transformation matrix
PT to both sides of Eq. (11), and noticing the orthogonal property
1/2 T 1/2
A = 6
m Um H(1)Vm 6
m of the matrix P, this yields
(7)
1/2
C = ETm Um 6
m N
!
X
where ETm = [Ind 0nd 0nd ]. From the state matrix A and output PT
K i K i
PPT j = j PT MPPT j . (12)
i=1
matrix C, the modal parameters, such as natural frequencies, mode
shapes, and damping ratios can be determined. Eq. (12) can be partitioned into the master and slave sets of DOFs
as
2.2. The dynamic reduction based damage-detection method N N
X X
Kmm i Kimm Kms i Kims  j 
The eigen-system equation and the global stiffness matrix of a i=1 i=1 m
N-DOF finite element (FE) model can be written as N
X N
X s
j
i Kism i Kiss

j Ksm Kss
K = j Mj for j = 1, . . . , Nt (8) i=1 i=1
N
m
  j 
Mmm Mms
= j
X
K = K () = K i Ki , = [1 , 2 , . . . , N ]T (9) Msm Mss js
(13)
i=1
j j
where K, M are the global stiffness and mass matrix of the FE where m and s are the measured part (with dimension Nm )
model, respectively. In this study, damage is mainly due to the and unmeasured part (with dimension Ns ) of j , respectively, and
buckling of secondary members of the target transmission tower, Nm + Ns = N. Eq. (13) consists of two sets (i.e., the upper and lower
and it is assumed that there is no change in the mass distribution sets) of equations. By rearranging the lower set of equations, one
of the structural system. The global mass matrix of the health obtains
structure, M, is used here instead of its corresponding damaged
matrix, M. j = (2 fj )2 is the jth eigen-value of the structural js = D j , jm


(14)
2012 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019

of Ki . These matrices have the following forms:

KRm = KRm j , = TTj KTj ,

MRm = MRm j , = TTj MTj ,

(21)
Kim Kim j , = TTj Ki Tj .


=
Eq. (20) can be expressed in the following matrix form

A () = b () (22)

where

a11 a12 a1N

a21 a22 a2N
A () = . .. .. .. ,

. .

. . .
N N N
a1 t a2 t aNt
(Nt Nm )N (23)
z1

Fig. 1. The iteration strategy for solving the set of non-linear equations. z2
b () =
..

.
where the matrix D(j , ) is given by
zNt (Nt Nm )1
N
! 1
X and
D j , = i Kiss j Mss


Kss
j j
ai = ai j , jm , = Kim jm


i=1 (24)
N
!
zj = zj j , , = j
KRm R
.
j



X
j Mm (25)
Ksm i Kism j Msm . (15) m m

i=1 Eq. (22) is a set of implicit non-linear equations of the unknown

parameters , which can be calculated as
It should be noted that the matrix D is related not only to
j but also to the vector of unknown damage parameters . For = A() b() (26)
simplification, the symbol Dj is adopted to represent D(j , ) in the
where A () is the pseudo inverse matrix of A (). The solution of
following formulations. A transformation matrix that expands the
can be obtained by the following simple algorithm (see Fig. 1):
measured mode shape vector to the full model shape vector of the
FE model can be expressed as 1. The algorithm is started by assuming an initial trial of (i.e., 0 ),
  and initializing the iteration counter k = 1.
Tj = Tj (j , ) =
IN m
(16) 2. In the kth iteration step, the kth estimation of is calculated
Dj
N Nm using Eq. (26), i.e., k = A (k1 ) b (k1 ).
3. The change in the estimation of in two successive iterations
where INm is the identity matrix with dimension Nm Nm . Thus,
is calculated. If the change is smaller than the pre-defined
threshold value , the iteration will stop and k will be treated
jm
 
= Tj jm . (17) as the solution. Otherwise, the iteration will continue by
js increasing the counter k by 1.
Substituting Eq. (17) into Eq. (13) leads to In Phase I of the proposed methodology, the natural frequencies
and mode shapes of the healthy (j , jm ) and damaged (j , m )
! j
N
states of the structure are obtained. The set of model parameters
X
K i Ki Tj jm = j MTj jm (18)
i =1
for both states can then be calculated using Eq. (22) as follows:

A = b



where
    (27)
A = b .
   
Kmm Kms Mmm Mms
K= , M= ,
Ksm Kss Msm Mss
(19) When solving Eq. (27) using the iteration algorithm as shown
Kimm Kims
 
i
K = . in Fig. 1, two sets of identified parameters, i.e., and can be
Kism Kiss
obtained. The damage state of the transmission tower can then be
Pre-multiplying TTj to both sides of Eq. (18), the eigen-system estimated by calculating the equivalent stiffness reduction by
equation of the reduced model that corresponds to the Nm master
1 = . (28)
DOF can be obtained:
N
! The proposed methodology has been verified by a comprehensive
series of numerical case studies. It was found that the simple
X
KRm i
i Km =
j
m
R
j Mm j
m (20)
iteration algorithm is very efficient, and the results of damage
i =1
detection are not sensitive to the effect of modeling error. Due
where KRm and MRm are the reduced global stiffness and mass to space limitations, the verification from only one transmission
matrices of the jth mode, respectively. Kim is the reduced matrix tower sample is presented in the next section.
 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019 2013

Fig. 2. Three-dimensional FE model of the transmission tower.

3. Numerical verifications

3.1. Description of the transmission tower example

Fig. 2 shows the three-dimensional FE model of a typical

transmission tower developed in the ANSYS software. The FE
model comprises two types of 3D element. The linear elastic frame
elements are used to model the main members (cross arms, beams,
and columns), while the truss elements are employed to capture
the structural behavior of the secondary members. The whole FE
model consists of 58 nodes and 240 elements (120 frame elements
and 120 truss elements), and the dimensions of the full system
matrices are 324 by 324. It is assumed that all braces are circular
sections and all other members are circular tubes. The sectional
and material properties for generating a set of measured dynamic
responses to verify the proposed methodology in the absence
of modeling error are given in Table 1. To consider the effect
of modeling error, another set of measurements is simulated by
introducing 2% of random error in the model parameters (see the
parameters given in parenthesis in Table 1). When modeling error
is considered, the class of identification models employed in the Fig. 3. Analytical mode shapes of the transmission tower: (a) 1st mode (2.7367 Hz,
damage detection process is not included in the class of models 1st vibration mode in the X direction), (b) 2nd mode (2.7448 Hz, 1st vibration mode
in the Z direction), (c) 3rd mode (3.5718 Hz, 1st torsion mode about the Y axis),
employed in simulating the set of dynamic data. Fig. 3 shows the (d) 4th mode (5.8372 Hz, 2nd vibration mode in the X direction), (e) 5th mode
natural frequencies and mode shapes of the first six modes of the (6.0936 Hz, 2nd vibration mode in the Z direction), (f) 6th mode (8.6938 Hz, 2nd
transmission tower (i.e., the 1st and 2nd vibration modes in the X torsion mode about the Y axis).
and Z directions, and the 1st and 2nd torsion modes).
To simplify the presentation of the damage detection results, 3.2. Phase I: Modal parameter identification by NExTERA
only the front face along the X direction and the left face along
the Z direction (see Fig. 4) are considered in the damage detection In generating the time domain structural responses, the system
process. The tower is divided into 12 sub-structures as shown in is assumed to be classically damped with a 1% damping ratio for
Fig. 4. These are sub-structures 1 to 6 on the front face, and sub- all modes. Only the 500 s of data with a time step of Dt = 0.04 s
structures 7 to 12 on the left face. Each sub-structure is adopted are measured. Twelve sensors are employed in this case study;
to monitor the damage of two secondary members. For example, their location and direction are summarized in Fig. 4(c). To consider
the effect of measurement noise, 10% root mean square (RMS)
sub-structure 1 on the front face monitors the damage of braces 1
Gaussian white noise is added to the simulated acceleration time
and 2.
history.
Three damage cases are presented in this paper. The damage
It is clear that the vibration modes in the X and Z directions are
is simulated by an 80% stiffness reduction for the corresponding
perpendicular to each other, and are thus not correlated or only
member. Case 1 is a single-damage case, in which only brace 1 is weakly corrected. In this situation, two reference channels, one in
damaged. Case 2 is a double-damage case, in which braces 1 and the X and another in the Z direction, are necessary for identifying
5 are damaged. Case 3 is also a double-damage case, with braces a set of meaningful mode shapes. The modal identification process
1 and 17 as the damaged members. To investigate the effect of is divided into two parts (one for modes in the X direction and the
including different modes in the damage-detection process, six other for modes in the Z direction). The complete modes are then
mode combinations (MC), as shown in Table 2, are considered in obtained by combining the modes from both directions. The two
all damage cases. reference channels in this case study are at the third floor, which
2014 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019
Fig. 4. The numbering of members and substructures, and the sensor configuration: (a) Front face, (b) left face, (c) sensor configuration (channels 16 are in the Z direction,
channels 712 are in the X direction.)s.
Fig. 5. Acceleration time history of the healthy structure in the X direction (with
10% RMS noise): (a) channel 3, (b) channel 6.
is selected because none of the modes of interest in the system has
a nodal point at this position, indicating that all modes of interest
contribute to the response at this location.
Fig. 5 illustrates the acceleration time history (with 10% RMS
noise) of the healthy structure measured from channels 3 and 6 in
the X direction (see Fig. 4(c)). Fig. 6(a) shows the cross-correlation
function of the acceleration time history between channels 3 and 6
for the healthy structure. It is clear from the figure that the cross-
correlation function has the same characteristic as a free vibration
response. Fig. 6(b) shows the single-sided amplitude spectrum
of the cross-correlation functions of the healthy and all damage
cases. From the spectrum, the changes in natural frequencies in
different damage cases are very similar. It can be concluded that
damage detection based solely on the shift in natural frequencies
is impractical.
The analytical and identified natural frequencies of the
transmission tower for all damage cases are summarized in Table 3
Fig. 6. Cross-correlation function and single-sided amplitude spectrum: (a) cross-
correlation function between channels 3 and 6 of the healthy structure, (b) single-
sided amplitude spectrum of the cross-correlation functions for all damage cases.
for reference. In the table, the symbols X and Z represent the
natural frequencies identified with the reference channel in the
X and Z directions, respectively. Specifically, the 1st, 3rd, and 4th
modes (i.e., the 1st and 2nd vibration modes in the X direction,
the 1st torsion mode about the Y -axis) are identified with the
reference channel in the X direction, while the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th
modes (i.e., the 1st and 2nd vibration modes in the Z direction, the
1st torsion mode about Y -axis) are identified with the reference
channel in Z direction. It is clear from the table that the influence
of damage at the higher frequencies (e.g., the 4th and 5th modes) is
much larger than that of damage at the lower modes (e.g., the first
three modes). This implies that higher modes are more sensitive to
the damage simulated in this case study.
Identified mode shapes for all damage cases are shown in
Figs. 7 and 8. Specifically, the 1st, 3rd, and 4th mode shapes
identified with the reference channel in the X direction are shown
 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019 2015

Table 1
Sectional and material properties of the transmission tower.
Columns Beams Cross arms Braces

7.5 102 6.5 102 5.5 102

Inner radius (m)
(7.43 102 ) (6.46 102 ) (5.54 102 )
8.3 102 7.0 102 5.9 102
Outer radius (m)
(8.36 102 ) (6.99 102 ) (5.98 102 )
2 3.97 103 2.12 103 1.43 103 3.00 104
Cross-sectional area A (m )
(4.59 103 ) (2.28 103 ) (1.56 103 ) (2.98 104 )
1.24 105 4.83 106 2.33 106
Moment of inertia Iyy = Izz (m4 )
(1.44 105 ) (5.15 106 ) (2.59 106 )
4 2.48 105 9.66 106 4.65 106
St. Venant torsion constant J (m )
(2.87 105 ) (1.03 105 ) (5.18 106 )
2.0 1011 2.0 1011 2.0 1011 2.0 1011
Youngs modulus E (Pa)
(1.998 1011 ) (1.998 1011 ) (1.998 1011 ) (1.998 1011 )
7.8 103 7.8 103 7.8 103 7.8 103
Mass density (kg/m3 )
(7.711 103 ) (7.711 103 ) (7.711 103 ) (7.711 103 )

Fig. 7. Three mode shapes identified with reference channel in the X direction: (a*) 1st mode shape, (b*) 3rd mode shape, (c*) 4th mode shape (* denotes 1 and 2 for the
components of mode shapes in X and Z directions, respectively).

in Fig. 7, and the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th mode shapes identified with the Table 2
Mode combinations considered in the study.
reference channel in the Z direction are shown in Fig. 8. It can be
seen from these two figures that the mode shapes for all cases are Mode combination (MC) Description
very similar. It is difficult to estimate the damage location and the number

corresponding extent by using the identified mode shapes alone.
Another observation is that the damage-induced changes in mode
shapes at higher modes are relatively larger, showing that higher
modes are generally more sensitive to damage in this case study.
1 All modes
2 The 1st torsion mode
3 The 2nd X and Z modes
4 The 1st X and Z modes and the 1st torsion mode
5 The 1st and 2nd X and Z modes
6 The 1st torsion mode and the 2nd X and Z modes

3.3. Phase II: Damage detection based on dynamic reduction

The order of modes of the structure in different damage
cases may be different, so the modal assurance criteria (MAC)
technique [36] is employed to ensure that the correct modes are
matched. For comparison, the analytical modes (those calculated
using the FE model) and the identified modes (those estimated by
NExTERA in Phase I with 10% measurement noise) are employed
separately to calculate the equivalent stiffness reduction of the
sub-structures using the proposed methodology.
3.3.1. Damage detection without modeling error
The damage detection results for different MCs (see Table 2)
using both the analytical and identified modes when modeling
error is not considered are summarized in Figs. 9 and 10,
2016 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019

Fig. 8. Three mode shapes identified with reference channel in the Z direction: (a*) 2nd mode shape, (b*) 3rd mode shape, (c*) 5th mode shape (* denotes 1 and 2 for the
components of mode shapes in X and Z directions, respectively).

Table 3
Analytical and identified natural frequencies (Hz) of the transmission tower.
1st mode 2nd mode 3rd mode 4th mode 5th mode
Mode description 1st vibration mode in 1st vibration mode 1st torsion mode 2nd vibration mode in 2nd vibration mode
the X direction in the Z direction about the Y axis the X direction in the Z direction

Analytical 2.7367 2.7448 3.5718 5.8372 6.0936

Healthy state X 2.7416 3.5809 5.8437
Identified
Z 2.7405 3.5807 6.0798
Analytical 2.7352 2.7441 3.5625 5.6972 6.0933
Case 1 X 2.7400 3.5681 5.6971
Identified
Z 2.7398 3.5734 6.0790
Analytical 2.7326 2.7435 3.5476 5.6015 6.0933
Case 2 X 2.7372 3.5508 5.6045
Identified
Z 2.7386 3.5555 6.0791
Analytical 2.7342 2.7418 3.5480 5.6971 5.9756
Case 3 X 2.7398 3.5514 5.6975
Identified
Z 2.7373 3.5553 5.9904

respectively. When there is no prior information, all identified
modes (i.e., MC 1) should be included in the damage detection
process. The results for other MCs (which use fewer modes) are
also given to show the effects of using less information in damage
detection.
From Figs. 9(a) and 10(a), it is clear that the damage at sub-
structure 1 in Case 1 can be identified in all MCs. It must be pointed
out that the damage detection results for not only MC 1 (all modes)
but also MC 6 (using only higher mode information, see Table 2)
are very good. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed
methodology successfully identifies the simulated damage in Case
1. The effect of considering fewer modes in damage detection is
discussed next. It is found from Fig. 9(a) that the identified damages
for MC 2 to MC 5 are as good as those in MCs 1 and 6. Whereas,
when the identified modes are utilized in the damage detection
process (see Fig. 10(a)), the detection results from other MCs are
not as good as those in MCs 1 and 6.
Case 2 is used to verify the proposed methodology when there
are two instance of damage on the same face. Consider MCs 1
and 6 of Figs. 9(b) and 10(b), the proposed methodology clearly
identifies the damage on sub-structures 1 and 3. As expected, the
performance of other MCs (which use less information) is not as
good as that of MCs 1 and 6, especially when using the identified
modes (see Fig. 10(b)).
Case 3 considers the situation when the two damages are on
different faces (i.e., one on the front face and the other on the left
face). It is clear from the Figs. 9(c) and 10(c) that the proposed
methodology can identify separate instances of damage even
when they are on different faces of the transmission tower. One
important observation from all three cases is that the performance
of MC 6 (including only higher mode information, see Table 2) is
generally as good as or, in using the identified modes, a little bit
better than that of MC 1 (all modes). This observation implies that
including all modes in the analysis does not necessarily provide
the best result, especially in real situations when measurement
noise is unavoidable. Furthermore, including only higher mode
information (as in MC 6) can sometimes provide better damage
detection results.
 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019
Fig. 9. Identified damages without modeling error using information from different
MCs utilizing analytical modes: (a) Case 1, (b) Case 2, (c) Case 3.
3.3.2. Damage detection with modeling error
The damage detection results for all damage cases and all MCs
when modeling error is considered are summarized in Fig. 11.
Considering Fig. 11(a), the proposed methodology identified a 30%
reduction in stiffness of sub-structure 1 in Case 1 and MC 1. The
estimated reductions in stiffness on other sub-structures are so
small that they can be neglected. The damage detection results
from MC 6 (including only higher mode information) are as good as
those from MC 1. Other MCs can also identify the damage on sub-
structure 1, but they are not as good as those in MCs 1 and 6, and
some of them give a false alarm, especially for MCs 2 and 4.
In Case 2, MC 1 (see Fig. 11(b)) can identify the two damaged
sub-structures (i.e., 1 and 3), and the estimated reductions in
stiffness are about 30%, which are large enough to indicate
the damaged sub-structures. It must be pointed out that MC 6
can provide slightly better results than MC 1 in this case. This
observation shows that including all of the modes in the analysis
may not necessarily provide the best result when modeling
error and measurement noise are evident. This can be explained
by the fact that some of the modes are not sensitive to the
damage. The insensitive modes may be seriously contaminated
by measurement noise. The performance of damage detection (or
model updating) may be affected by including those modes in
analysis. It is found that the estimated stiffness reductions for sub-
structures 1 and 3 in other MCs which use less mode information
are not as accurate as those in MC 1, and all of them contain false
alarms.
Considering Case 3 (Fig. 11(c)), the performances of MCs 1 and
6 are very good, and the detection results for MC 6 are almost
as good as those in MC 1. Other MCs can identify the damaged
sub-structure with some additional false alarms. In addition, the
identified equivalent stiffness reduction of sub-structure 1 for
2017
Fig. 10. Identified damages without modeling error using information from
different MCs utilizing identified modes: (a) Case 1, (b) Case 2, (c) Case 3.
MCs 2 and 4 is only about 20%, which is much smaller than that
for other MCs in this case.
In addition, it can be observed from Figs. 911 that the damage-
detection results for MCs 6, 2, and 3 are very similar to those for
MCs 1, 4, and 5, respectively. Referring to Table 2, when the 1st
X and Z vibration modes are removed from MCs 1, 4, and 5, they
become MCs 6, 2, and 3, respectively. This implies that the 1st X
and Z vibration modes provide very little information for damage
detection. This observation shows that higher modes are usually
more sensitive to damage than lower modes.
3.3.3. The convergence of the proposed methodology
The convergence of the proposed numerical algorithm as shown
in Fig. 1 is now studied. The iteration histories of sub-structure
1 for Case 1 with modeling error in MCs 3 and 4 are shown in
Fig. 12, where the iteration steps under both healthy and damaged
states are shown. It is clear from these two sub-figures that the
convergence rates in both damage cases are very fast. It takes only
4 and 5 iteration steps for MCs 3 and 4, respectively, to achieve the
solution. Furthermore, the estimations in both MCs after the first
step are already very close to the solution.
4. Conclusions
This paper describes a practical and efficient damage detec-
tion methodology that is tailor-made for transmission towers.
The characteristics of transmission towers are incorporated dur-
ing the development stage. By considering only damage on sec-
ondary members and adopting the concept of sub-structures, the
proposed methodology requires only a small number of sensors
to identify damaged sub-structures by estimating the correspond-
ing equivalent reduction in stiffness. The proposed methodology
2018 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019
Fig. 11. Identified damages with modeling error using information from different
MCs utilizing identified modes: (a) Case 1, (b) Case 2, (c) Case 3.
contains two phases. The first phase identifies the modal param-
eters from the ambient vibration response of the target transmis-
sion tower following the NExTERA technique. In the second phase,
the equivalent damage extent for each sub-structure is calculated
based on the dynamic reduction technique using the results from
the first phase. The proposed methodology converts the damage-
detection problem into a set of implicit nonlinear equations. A
simple but computationally efficient iteration algorithm is used to
solve this set of nonlinear equations.
A typical 3D transmission tower model is employed in the case
study to illustrate and verify the proposed methodology in the
presence of both measurement noise and modeling error. In all
three damage cases, the methodology can successfully identify
the damaged sub-structure. The case study also investigates
the effect of including different modes in the damage-detection
results. As expected, including all modes in the analysis may not
necessary resulting in the best performance in the presence
of measurement noise and modeling error. Further research is
necessary in addressing this issue. One promising approach is to
follow the probabilistic method in the modal identification process
for calculating the uncertainties associated with each identified
modal parameters (this can be done by calculating the covariance
matrix or the coefficient of variation of the identified modal
parameters). In the model updating or damage detection process, a
larger weighting factor should be applied to the modal parameter
with smaller uncertainty (or smaller coefficient of variation). Many
existing structural damage detection methods were verified by
very simple examples, such as 2-dimensional beams, trusses, or
frames. The 3-dimensional transmission tower case study in this
paper tests the performance of the proposed methodology in
a more realistic environment. It must be pointed out that the
transmission tower example employed in this study is statically
Fig. 12. Iteration history for sub-structure 1 of Case 1 using identified modes with
modeling error: (a) MC 3, (b) MC 4.
indeterminate with very high degree of redundancy. For this type
of structure, removing several members may have only a very
limited effect on the global stiffness of the system. Structural
damage detection of this type of structure is very challenging.
Further research work is carrying out on the experimental ver-
ification of the proposed methodology using a scaled transmis-
sion tower model under laboratory conditions. Particular atten-
tion will be paid on the effects of the external forces from the
power cables on the modal identification using NExTERA tech-
nique in Phase I of the proposed methodology. If operational modal
analysis (or output-only modal analysis) methods cannot identify
the modal parameters in an acceptable accuracy, force transduc-
ers are required to measure the force induced by the power cables
on the tower and a multiple-inputmultiple-output (MIMO) tech-
nique has to be adopted in extracting the modal parameters from
the measured dynamic data.
Acknowledgements
The work described in this article was fully supported by a
Strategic Research Grant (7001970) of the City University of Hong
Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
References
[1] Smith BW. A review of dynamic aspects of transmission line design. Eng Struct
1993;15(4):2715.
[2] Yasui H, Marukawa H, Momomura Y, Ohkuma T. Analytical study on wind-
induced vibration of power transmission towers. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn
1999;83(13):43141.
[3] Gantes C, Khoury R, Connor JJ, Pouangare C. Modeling, loading, and preliminary
design considerations for tall guyed towers. Comput Struct 1993;49(5):
797805.
[4] Battista RC, Rodrigues RS, Pfeil MS. Dynamic behavior and stability of
transmission line towers under wind forces. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2003;
91(8):105167.
[5] Ghobarah A, Aziz TS, El-Attar M. Response of transmission lines to multiple
support excitation. Eng Struct 1996;18(12):93646.
[6] Salawu OS. Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: A
review. Eng Struct 1997;19(9):71823.
[7] Carden EP, Fanning F. Vibration based condition monitoring: A review. Struct
Health Monit 2004;3(4):35577.
[8] Lam HF, Yuen KV, Beck JL. Structural health monitoring via measured Ritz
vectors utilizing artificial neural networks. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng
2006;21(4):23241.
[9] Kim JT, Ryu YS, Cho HM, Stubbs N. Damage identification in beam-type
structures: Frequency-based method vs mode-shape-based method. Eng
Struct 2003;25(1):5767.
[10] Lam HF, Lee YY, Sun HY, Cheng GF, Guo X. Application of the spatial
wavelet transform and Bayesian approach to the crack detection of a partially
obstructed beam. Thin-Walled Struct 2005;43(1):121.
[11] Yam LH, Li YY, Wong WO. Sensitivity studies of parameters for damage
detection of plate-like structures using static and dynamic approaches. Eng
Struct 2002;24(11):146575.
[12] Loutridis S, Douka E, Hadjileontiadis LJ, Trochidis A. A two-dimensional
wavelet transform for detection of cracks in plates. Eng Struct 2005;27(9):
132738.
 T. Yin et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 20092019
[13] Yuen KV, Lam HF. On the complexity of artificial neural networks for smart
structures monitoring. Eng Struct 2006;28(7):97784.
[14] Lam HF, Ng CT. The selection of pattern features for structural damage
detection using an extended Bayesian ANN algorithm. Eng Struct 2008;30(10):
276270.
[15] Kang WJ, Chen ZH, Lam HF, Zuo CR. Analysis and design of the general
and outmost-ring stiffened suspen-dome structures. Eng Struct 2003;25(13):
168595.
[16] Katafygiotis LS, Yuen KV. Bayesian spectral density approach for modal
updating using ambient data. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2001;30(8):110323.
[17] Lam HF, Katafygiotis LS, Mickleborough NC. Application of a statistical model
updating approach on Phase I of the IASC-ASCE structural health monitoring
benchmark study. J Eng Mech ASCE 2004;130(1):3448.
[18] Siringoringo DM, Fujino Y. System identification of suspension bridge from
ambient vibration response. Eng Struct 2008;30(2):46277.
[19] James GH, Carne TG, Lauffer JP, Nord AR. Modal testing using natural excitation.
In: Proceedings of 10th international modal analysis conference. 1992.
[20] Farrar CR, James III GH. System identification from ambient vibration
measurements on a bridge. J Sound Vib 1997;205(1):118.
[21] Juang JN, Pappa RS. An eigensystem realization algorithm for modal parameter
identification and model reduction. J Guid Control Dyn 1985;8(5):6207.
[22] Yu L, Link M, Law SS, Zhang LM. A structural damage identification procedure
with application to a frame structure with bolted joints. In: Proceedings of
17th international modal analysis conference. 1999.
[23] Yin T, Zhu HP, Yu L. Noise analysis for sensitivity based structural damage
detection. Appl Math Mech (English Edition) 2007;28(6):74150.
[24] Zhu AW, Qu GJ, Gao YN. Matrix reduction method for updating dynamic model.
Chin Space Sci Technol 2003;2:610 [in Chinese].
2019
[25] Guyan RJ. Reduction of stiffness and mass matrices. AIAA J 1965;3(2):380.
[26] OCallahan JC. A procedure for an improved reduced system (IRS) model. In:
Proceedings of 7th international modal analysis conference. 1989. p. 1721.
[27] Kidder RL. Reduction of structural frequency equations. AIAA J 1973;11(6):892.
[28] Friswell MI, Garvey SD, Penny JET. Model reduction using dynamic and iterated
IRS techniques. J Sound Vib 1995;186(2):31123.
[29] Zhang DW, Wei FS. Model updating and damage detection. Beijing: Since
Press; 1999 [in Chinese].
[30] Islam S, Huang S, Skokan M, Mostafa K. Performance based seismic retrofit of a
high-rise tower using buckling restrained braced frames. In: Proceedings, 8th
US national conference on earthquake engineering. 2006.
[31] Black CJ, Makris N, Aiken ID. Component testing, seismic evaluation and
characterization of buckling-restrained braces. J Struct Eng ASCE 2004;130(6):
88094.
[32] Ookouch Y, Takeuchi T, Uchiyama T, Suzuki K, Sugiyama T, Ogawa T, et al.
Experimental studies of tower structures with hysteretic dampers. J Internat
Assoc Shell Spatial Struct 2006;47(3):22936.
[33] Albermani F, Mahendran M, Kitipornchai S. Upgrading of transmission towers
using a diaphragm bracing system. Eng Struct 2004;26(6):73544.
[34] Caicedo JM, Dyke SJ, Johnson EA. Natural excitation technique and eigensys-
tem realization algorithm for Phase I of the IASC-ASCE benchmark problem:
Simulated data. J Eng Mech ASCE 2004;130(1):4960.
[35] Beck JL, May BS, Polidori DC. Determination of modal parameters from ambient
vibration data for structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of 1st world
conference on structural control. 1994.
[36] Allemang RJ, Brown DL. A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis. In:
Proceedings of 1st international modal analysis conference. 1982. p. 1106.