A Novel Method Crack Detection Beam Like Structures Measurements Natural Frequencies

Journal of Sound and Vibration 333 (2014) 40844103
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Sound and Vibration

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsvi
A novel method for crack detection in beam-like structures

by measurements of natural frequencies
N.T. Khiem n, L.K. Toan
Institute of mechanics, VAST, 264, Doi Can, Ba Dinh, Hanoi, Vietnam
a r t i c l e in f o
abstract
Article history:
Received 12 June 2013
Received in revised form
20 January 2014
Accepted 13 April 2014
Handling Editor: L.G. Tham
Available online 10 May 2014
A novel method is proposed for calculating the natural frequencies of a multiple cracked
beam and detecting unknown number of multiple cracks from the measured natural
frequencies. First, an explicit expression of the natural frequencies through crack
parameters is derived as a modification of the Rayleigh quotient for the multiple cracked
beams that differ from the earlier ones by including nonlinear terms with respect to crack
severity. This expression provides a simple tool for calculating the natural frequencies of
the beam with arbitrary number of cracks instead of solving the complicated characteristic
equation. The obtained nonlinear expression for natural frequencies in combination with
the so-called crack scanning method proposed recently by the authors allowed the
development of a novel procedure for consistent identification of unknown amount of
cracks in the beam with a limited number of measured natural frequencies. The developed
theory has been illustrated and validated by both numerical and experimental results.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Multiple cracked beam
Modal analysis
Frequency-based method
Crack detection
Rayleigh quotient
1. Introduction
The condition assessment of structure and machinery is a vital concern in structural and mechanical engineering.
A number of methods have been proposed to detect damage in structures and most of them are based on the change in their
dynamic characteristics [13]. Among the numerous procedures developed for damage detection, the techniques based on
damage-induced change in natural frequencies have been most early engaged [48] and they have been used until now [911].
This is because of the fact that the natural frequencies are most easily and accurately measured in comparison with other
dynamic characteristics of a structure. The major drawbacks of the frequency-based approach are the weak sensitivity of the
measured frequencies to damage, and the same change in frequencies might be caused by different damages. Also, the detection
of unknown number of damages in a structure is in general an unsolved problem. Therefore, seeking the way to overcome the
shortcomings of the frequency-based methods of damage detection is a promising subject.
The theoretical basis of the frequency-based methods for damage detection is the so-called characteristic equation that
relates the natural frequencies to damage parameters. The first compact form of the characteristic equation was conducted
in [1215] for a beam-like structure with a single crack. Then, the equation has been established in different forms for the
beam with multiple cracks [1620]. Though the characteristic equation has been obtained explicitly, the natural frequencies
could be computed just numerically as the implicit functions of damage parameters. This implicit representation of natural
frequencies causes a difficulty in solving the problems associated with the damage detection from only natural frequencies.
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: ntkhiem@imech.ac.vn (N.T. Khiem), lktoan@imech.ac.vn (L.K. Toan).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.04.031
0022-460X/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N.T. Khiem, L.K. Toan / Journal of Sound and Vibration 333 (2014) 40844103
4085
An explicit expression of natural frequencies in terms of crack magnitude was derived approximately in [21] and applied for
damage detection in [22] for the case of small cracks by using the perturbation method. A system of linear equations relating
the shift of natural frequencies with a variation of both the crack magnitudes and positions has been conducted in [23] but it
was determined only numerically using the finite element method. By introducing the so-called element damage index, the
authors of references [2426] were able to express natural frequency shifts in terms of the damage indices in the form of
linear equations that provide a useful tool for damage localization by measured natural frequencies. Although the
conventional Rayleigh method was earlier employed for determining the natural frequency of a cracked beam by Shen
and Pierre [27], an explicit expression of natural frequency was obtained much later by Fernandez-Saez et al. in [28] with
the use of the Rayleigh method. Nevertheless, this appealing expression is applied only for calculating the fundamental
frequency of a beam with a single crack. Later, Fernandez-Saez and Navarro [29] obtained a more accurate expression of
natural frequencies for a singly cracked beam, but it was limited to applying for determining the upper and lower bounds
of the fundamental frequencies only. Recently, an expansion of the Rayleigh quotient for calculating the natural frequencies
of a cracked beam has been developed in [30] but as with the former results, it has not been straightforward to use for the
crack detection problem.
Note here that though the comprehensive literature on the development of the frequency-based method for damage
detection in structures has been published, very few papers are devoted to investigating the case of previously unknown
number of damages. This posed a more widespread problem to predict also the number of damages mutually with their
locations and sizes by the measurement of modal parameters. Developing the idea that emerged in the paper [8], the
so-called crack scanning method is proposed in [31] to detect unknown number of cracks in a beam based on the measured
natural mode shape. The main idea of the procedure is first to estimate unknown magnitudes of all the cracks assumed at a
chosen grid of positions in the structure using the given data and this process is performed iteratively by eliminating the
positions from the grid where the estimated magnitudes are zero or negative. The actual cracks would be acknowledged at
the locations of the grid that could not be reduced by the removing positions with zero and negative magnitude. Actually,
the proposed procedure enables us to determine not only the location and magnitude but also the quantity of cracks.
Certainly, this procedure can be applied not only for the case of measured mode shapes as performed in [31] but also for the
case of other modal parameters such as natural frequencies or frequency response functions.
The present paper aims to develop the scanning method for detecting unknown number of cracks in a beam by the
measurement of natural frequencies. Firstly, the Rayleigh quotient is derived for the multiple cracked beam that enables us
to conduct an explicit expression of natural frequencies in terms of crack positions and sizes by choosing the shape function
first suggested in [28]. Such obtained frequency representation provides a simple and efficient tool for calculating every
natural frequency of the beam with arbitrary number of cracks. The most important difference of the constructed explicit
expression from those derived by the perturbation [21], sensitivity method [23] and the energy approach [2426] is that the
obtained herein expression included additionally the nonlinear terms of the crack magnitudes. Then, the obtained explicit
expression is straightforward to apply the aforementioned scanning method for identification of the multiple cracks from
natural frequencies. In this regard, the nonlinear terms taken into account could be helpful for us to overcome the nonuniqueness solution of damage detection problem in the beam with symmetrical boundary conditions. The theoretical
development is validated by both numerical and experimental examples.
2. The Rayleigh quotient for the multiple cracked beam
Let's consider a uniform EulerBernoulli beam with clamped ends and the following material and geometrical constants:
Young's modulus E, mass density , length L, cross section area Fb h and moment of inertia I. Suppose, moreover, that the
beam has been damaged to crack at a number of positions 0 ! e1 ! ! en ! 1 with the depth (a1,, an). If the spring
model of the cracks is adopted the spring stiffness Kj is calculated from the crack depth aj by [16]
j EI=LK j 5:346h=LI c aj =h;
(1)
I c z 1:8624z2 3:95z3 16:375z4 37:226z5 76:81z6 126:9z7 172z8 143:97z9 66:56z10 ;

where the parameter j EI/LKj has been introduced to represent severity of the crack and termed by crack magnitude.
For the beam, kth natural frequency and mode shape denoted by k, k(x) satisfy equation
4
d k x=dx4 4k k x 0; x A ej 1 ; ej ;
j 1; ; n 1; e0 0; en 1 1;
(2)
k 0 0k 0 k 1 0k 1 0:
(3)
4k
L F2k =EI
and boundary conditions
Additionally, the mode shape k(x) should satisfy the following conditions at cracks:
k ej k ej ; k ej k ej ; k ej k ej ; 0k ej k ej j k ej ; j 1; :::; n:
(4)
4086
1.001
1
Ratio of first eigenvalue
0.999
0.998
0.997
0.996
0.995
0.994
0.993
0.992
0.991
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Crack position along beam length

Fig. 1. Comparison of the fundamental frequency computed by using the characteristic equation method (solid and black lines) and the Rayleigh
approximation with different values of the correcting factor (the dotted lines represent the first order approximation). The crack depth equals 10%, 20%,
and 30%.
Ratio of second eigenvalue
1.002
0.998
0.996
0.994
0.992
0.99
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

Fig. 2. Comparison of the second frequency computed by using the characteristic equation method (solid black lines) and the Rayleigh approximation with
different values of the correcting factor (the dotted lines represent the first order approximation). The crack depth equals 10%, 20%, and 30%.
Now, first, multiplying both sides of Eq. (2) by k(x), then taking integration along the beam segment (ej 1, ej) and
summation lead to
n1
(Z
j1
)
(Z
)
4
ej
n1
d k x
4
2
xdx
xdx
:
k
k
k
dx4
ej 1
ej 1
j1
ej
(5)
Note that for the functions x; 0 x; x; 0 x that are all continuous in the segment (a,b) it can be easily obtained
Z
a
d x
xdx
dx4
Z
a

2 xdx Bb Ba ;
(6)
4087
1.002
Ratio of Third eigenvalue
0.998
0.996
0.994
0.992
0.99
0.988
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

Fig. 3. Comparison of the third frequency computed by using the characteristic equation method (solid and black lines) and the Rayleigh approximation
with different values of the correcting factor (the dotted lines represent the first order approximation). The crack depth equals 10%, 20%, and 30%.
where
Bx 0 xx x0 x:
Applying the equality (6) for the integrals on the left hand side of Eq. (5) we notice that e0 0, en 1 1 gives
n1
j1
ej
ej 1
d x
xdx
dx4 k
1
0

2
k xdx Bk 1 Bk 0 Bk ej Bk ej :
j1
Taking into account the conditions (3) and (4) the latter equation becomes
n1
j1
ej
ej 1
d x
xdx
dx4 k
and, consequently, Eq. (5) can be rewritten as

"Z
4k
1
0
2
2
k xdx j k ej
(7)
j1
#,Z
2
2
k xdx j k ej
j1
1
0
2k xdx:
(8)
This is the Rayleigh quotient extended for the multiple cracked beam. Note that the well-known Rayleigh quotient in the
past has been utilized for calculating the natural frequencies with a properly chosen mode shape as trial shape function. In
the present study, the quotient (8) is employed for establishing an explicit expression of the eigenvalue in terms of crack
parameters (positions and magnitude). For the purpose, following Fernandez-Saez et al. [28] the mode shape function is
selected in the form
k x 0k x Akj x3 Bkj x2 C kj x Dkj ;
x A ej 1 ; ej ; j 1; ; n 1;
(9)
where 0k(x) is kth mode shape of intact beam with clamped ends and Akj, Bkj, Ckj, Dkj are constants determined as following.
Substituting the shape function (9) into conditions (4) at the crack position ej yields
Akj Ak;j 1 ; Bkj Bk;j 1 ; C k;j 1 C kj j k ej ; Dk;j 1 Dkj j k ej ej
(10)
or
j1
Akj Ak1 ; Bkj Bk1 ; C kj C k1 i k ei ;

i1
j1
Dkj Dk1 ei i k ei ; j 1; ; n 1:
i1
(11)
4088
0.99
0.99
0.995
0.98
0.98
0.97
0.97
0.96
0.96
0.95
0.95
0.99
0.985
0.98
0.975
0.94
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.94
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
Crack depth
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.995
0.99
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Crack depth
Crack depth
0.99
0.98
0.99
0.97
0.98
0.985
0.96
0.98
0.97
0.95
0.975
0.94
0.97
0.96
0.93
0.95
0.965
0.92
0.91
0.96
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Crack depth
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.94 0
0.05
0.1
Crack depth
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Crack depth
Fig. 4. The six lowest natural frequencies versus equal crack depth (from 0% to 50%) of triple cracks at 0.2; 0.45 and 0.7 in different nonlinear factors
compared to solution of the characteristic equation. (a) 1st, (b) 2nd, (c) 3rd, (d) 4th, (e) 5th and (f) 6th frequencies.
Fig. 5. Experimental model for modal testing fixedfixed beam.
The latter equations show that it remains only four constants Ak1, Bk1, Ck1, Dk1 that can be easily determined from
boundary conditions (3) rewritten in the form
C k1 Dk1 0;
n
Ak1 Bk1 j 1 ej k ej 0;
j1
3Ak1 2Bk1 j k ej 0
j1
(12)
4089
Table 1
Comparison of calculated and measured natural frequencies for a beam with triple cracks at positions 0.2; 0.45; 0.7 in different scenarios of depth from 0%
to 50%.
Crack scenarios
Number of frequencies
1
(000)% (Uncracked)
(a)
(b)
(c)
43.1596
43.17
43.1596
118.971
119.0
118.971
233.2307
233.3
233.2307
385.5422
385.6
385.5422
575.9336
576.1
575.9336
804.4030
804.6
804.4030
(0100)% (Single crack)
(a)
(b)
(c)
43.1377
43.14
43,1376
118.9588
118.99
118,9588
233.1035
233.16
233,1031
385.4218
385.52
385,4214
575.7544
575.91
575,7539
803.9720
804.17
803.9700
(10100)% (Double crack)
(a)
(b)
(c)
43,1371
43,14
43,1370
118,9311
118.96
118,9310
232,9609
233.0
232,9603
385,2174
385.29
385,2155
575,6749
575.82
575,6744
803.9555
804.15
803.9531
(1010 10)% (Triple crack)
(a)
(b)
(c)
43,1323
43.14
43,1323
118,8541
118.87
118,8522
232,9065
232.93
232,9047
385,1886
385.2
385,1858
575,2884
575.38
575,2675
803.5648
803.7
803.5540
(102010)% (Triple crack)
(a)
(b)
(c)
43,0714
43.07
43,0709
118,8202
118.82
118,8175
232,5525
232.52
232,5444
384,8570
384.87
384,8450
574,7953
574.8
574,7522
802.3735
802.29
802.3591
(a)
(b)
(c)
43,0696
43.07
43,0692
118,7435
118.74
118,7387
232,1551
232.14
232,1450
384,2981
384.26
384,2690
574,5729
574.55
574,5226
802.3202
802.29
802.3081
(a)
(b)
(c)
43,0567
43.05
43,0557
118,5293
118.52
118,5028
232,0036
231.99
231,9776
384,2200
384.18
384,1791
573,5113
573.46
573,2092
801.2460
801.19
801.0904
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,9502
42.94
42,9474
118,4698
118.46
118,4383
231,3852
231.35
231,3258
383,65501
383.58
383,5639
572,6729
572.56
572,2382
799.1894
799.04
799.0690
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,9469
42.9
42,9442
118,3376
118.32
118,2944
230,6894
230.64
230.6249
382,7121
382.55
382.5520
572,2812
572.17
571.7976
799.1226
798.95
798.9608
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,9247
42.92
42.9198
117,9643
117.93
117.8232
230,4249
230.36
230.2858
382.5813
382.41
382.3678
570,4717
570.22
568.8627
797.2471
796.99
796.4205
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,8883
42.88
42.8752
117,3613
117.29
116.9249
230.0024
229.91
229.6113
382,3702
382.17
381.9864
567,5830
566.98
562.7077
794.3503
793.74
790.7068
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,7170
42.69
42,6991
117,2598
117.19
116.7935
228,9992
228.84
228.4308
381,4957
381.16
380.8805
566,3634
565.48
560.6276
790.9806
790.12
788.1119
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,7113
42.69
42.6932
117,0542
116.96
116.5210
227,8633
227.65
227.3346
380,0624
379.45
379.2809
565,7112
564.81
559.6245
790.9013
789.98
787.7905
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,7019
42.68
42.6830
116,7131
116.56
116.0545
226,0229
225.58
225.4519
377,8217
376.5
376,5362
564,7007
563.68
557.9088
790.7747
789.74
787.2419
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,4167
42.37
42.3807
116,5592
116.39
115.8285
224,3570
223.73
223.3967
376,5532
374.62
374.6201
562,6580
561.09
554,3245
785.5926
783.53
782.7899
(a)
(b)
(c)
42,3618
42.3
42.3028
115,5740
115.27
113.7744
223,6569
222.9
221.8603
376,2644
374.34
373.7671
558,3072
555.47
537.6546
780.8314
777.87
770.4146
(a) Solution of characteristic equation; (b) measurement; (c) calculated by the Rayleigh quotient actual crack positions: (0.20.450.7).
4090
Fig. 6. Iterative localization of single crack at position 0.45 with 10% depth.
Fig. 7. Iterative localization of double cracks at 0.2 and 0.45 with equal 10% depth.
Fig. 8. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.2, 0.45 and 0.7 with equal 10% depth.
Fig. 9. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.2, 0.45 and 0.7 with 10%20%10% depth.
4091
4092
Fig. 11. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.2, 0.45 and 0.7 with equal 20% depth.
4093
or
n
Ak1 j 1 2ej k ej ;
Bk1 j 3ej 2k ej :
j1
(13)
j1
Thus, the shape function (9) is completely determined and it allows us to calculate the numerator and denominator of
the quotient (8) as follows:
Z 1
Z 1
Z 1
Z 1
2
2
2
xdx
6A
x
2B

dx
xdx
4
0k x3Ak1 x Bk1 dx
k1
k1
k
0k
0k
0
0
n
j1
3Ak1 x Bk1 dx
j 2
k ej
j1
2
2
2
k0 xdx 12Ak1 12Ak1 Bk1 Bk1 ;
j 2
0k ej 4
j 0k ej 3Ak1 Bk1 :
j1
Therefore, the numerator of quotient (8) becomes

Z 1
n
2
2
Num
0k xdx j 0k ej 21 ;
j1
21 i j ij 0k ei k0 ej ; ji 6ei ej 15ei ej 4;
j; i 1; ; n:
i;j 1
On the other hand,

(Z
Z 1
n1
2k xdx
j1
ej
ej 1
n1
j1
"Z
)
2k xdx
ej
ej 1
n1
"Z
j1
ej
ej 1
20k xdx 2
#
where the following notations have been introduced

Z 1
Z
n1
0k xAk1 x3 Bk1 x2 dx
1
j1
Z
22
n1
Ak1 x3 Bk1 x2 2 dx
j1
ej
ej 1
ej
ej 1
ej
ej 1
Ak1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj 2 dx
(14)
0k xAk1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj dx

1
20k xdx 2 1 22 ;
(15)
4
0k xC kj x Dkj dx k0
j 2
0k ej ;
(16)
j1
C kj x Dkj 2 dx 2Ak1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj
dx
A2k1 Ak1 Bk1 B2k1 C k;n 1

4Ak1 5Bk1
1 n
3
C k;n 1 2j 2
C k;n 1 Dk;n 1 D2k;n 1

0k ej ej
10
3j1
7
3
5
3

n
C kj
3Ak1 4Bk1
A
B
Dk;n 1 j 0k ej k1 e5j k1 e4j e3j Dkj e2j
6
10
6
3
j1
n
qji j i k0 ej k0 ei ;
(17)
j1
(
qij
17=21 717ej =140 153e2j =35 e3j =3 e4j =6 e5j =10;
j i;
2=15 43ej ei =40 ej ei 2 ei ej =2 1 2ej 1 2ei =7 3ej 23ei 2=5

3ej ei 2e3j e3i =12 ej ei =5 1=3e4j e4i =2 e5j e5i =5; i a j;
In the latter equations the terms of order 3 with respect to the crack magnitudes have been neglected by using the
following approximation of constants Ckj, Dkj, Ak1, Bk1 defined in (11) and (13)
j
C kj i k ei i 0k ei ;
i1
j
Dkj
i1
i1
ei i k ei
i1
Ak1 j 1 2ej k ej j 1 2ej 0k ej ;
ei i 0k ei ;
j1
j1
Bk1
j1
Finally, the quotient (8) in this case can be written as

"Z
#,"Z
1
n
4
2
2
0k xdx j 0k ej 21
k
0
j1
1
0
j 3ej 2k ej
4
20k xdx 2k0
j 3ej 20k ej :
j1
j1
#
j 2
0k ej 22
(18)
4094
with 21, 22 defined in (14) and (17) as bilinear forms of {1,,n}. If the mode shape of the intact beam is chosen to be
R1
R1
4
normalized so that 0 20k xdx 1, consequently, 0 2
0k xdx 0k , then the quotient (18) becomes
n
j1
j1
4
4
4
2
k =0k 4 1 k0
j 2
0k ej k0 21 =1 2k0 j 0k ej 22 :
(19)
This is an explicit expression of natural frequencies of the multiple cracked beam in terms of crack parameters.
Representing the right hand side of Eq. (19) as the function
n
j1
n
i;j 1
n
1 aj e j bij e i j
f
1 2 aj e j dij e i j
j1
i;j 1
then expanding the function in Taylor series one obtains

n
f 1 f j 0 j 1=2
j1
f ij 0 i j ojj3
i;j 1 j 1
1 f j e j
j1
f ij e i j ;
i;j 1 j 1
where f j e aj e; f ij e bij e dij e and is a correcting factor that could be chosen to minimize the cut-off error of
the Taylor series. So, the second order asymptotic approximation with respect to small crack magnitudes {1,,n} of Eq. (19)
can be represented as
n
j1
i;j 1
4k 4k0 j 2
k0 ej k i j ij ei ; ej k0 ei k0 ej
(20a)
with ij ei ; ej 4k0 qij ij . The linear approximation is obtained by setting k 0 that gives rise to
n
4k 4k0 j 2
k0 ej :
j1
(20b)
4095
2.5
The First iteration - Linear model
x 10
3.5
The 6th iteration - Nonlinear mode
x 10
Crack magnitude
Crack magnitude
1.5
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3
Crack position
2.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Crack position
The 8th iteration - Nonlinear model
x 10
0.4
The 9th iteration - Linear model
x 10
7
2
Crack magnitude
Crack magbnitude
6
1.5
5
4
3
2
0.5
1
0
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Crack position
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Crack position
0.7
0.8
0.9
4096
Fig. 15. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.2-0.45-0.7 with 30%30%40% depth.
Fig. 16. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.2-0.45-0.7 with 30%40%40% depth.
The first iteration - Linear model
x 10
x 10
3.5
Estimated crack magnitude
4.5
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Scanning crack position
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.9

0.015
0.5
x 10
4097
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Fig. 17. Iterative localization of triple cracks at 0.20.450.7 with 40%40%40% depth.
x 10
0.012
0.014
7
6
5
4
3
0.01
0.008
0.006
0.004
2
0.002
1
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3

x 10
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.03
0.4
5
4
3
2
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
1
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
4098
The different forms of the linear Eq. (20b) have been obtained in [13,20,24] by using different approaches but the
nonlinear terms in (20a) have not yet been previously taken into consideration. In a subsequent section the nonlinear
expression (20a) is used to develop a novel procedure for crack detection in the beam from measured natural frequencies.
3. A procedure for crack detection by natural frequencies
The problem investigated in this section is to find out the location, depth and number of cracks in a clamped end beam
with parameters E, , L, F, I from given m natural frequencies 1 ; ; m . Since the number of potential cracks is unknown
the crack scanning method (CSM) proposed in [31] is used.
Procedure of the crack scanning method consists of the following tasks: (1) a number of cracks with unknown magnitude
(1,, n) is assumed to occur at a mesh of positions 0 re1 ! e2 ! ! en ! 1 in the structure of interest; (2) a model of
the structure with the presence of the cracks is constructed so that it could give rise to a straightforward correlation
between measurable characteristics of the structure and unknown crack magnitudes (1,, n); (3) the crack magnitude
unknowns (1,,n) are evaluated from the available measured data by using the constructed model; (4) potential cracks are
allocated at the positions e^ 1 ; ; e^ nc correspondingly to the definitely positive values ^ 1 ; ; ^ nc from the evaluated crack
magnitudes; (5) the crack positions detected e^ 1 ; ; e^ nc are used as a new crack position mesh for repeating the steps 24
until the detected crack mesh is unchanged; (6) actual cracks position and depth are determined from the crack mesh and
magnitudes detected in step 5 and Eq. (1).
Thus, the focus of the CSM applied to the problem of multiple crack detection is to estimate the crack magnitude vector
(1,,n)T from the given natural frequencies. The governing equations for the crack magnitude estimation are given
below.
As it is well known that the eigenvalues and normalized mode shapes of the intact beam with clamped ends are
10 4:7300408; 20 7:8532046; 30 10:9956078; 40 14:1371655;
(21)
k0 x sin k x sinh k x Ak cos k x cosh k x;

Ak sin k sinh k = cos k cosh k :
(22)
For the damaged beam the eigenvalues k can be determined from the given natural frequencies 1 ; ; m as
4
k FL4 2k =EI; k 1; 2; 3; and Eq. (19) can be rewritten in the form
A B b;
(23)
A akj 2
k0 ej ; B bkj 0k ej ij 0k ei i ; diag1 ; ; m ;
i1
4
b fb1 ; ; bm gT ; bk k 4k0 k ;
k 1; ; m; j 1; ; n:
(24)
This is a nonlinear equation for seeking the crack magnitude vector (1,,n) that can be solved by using the iteration
method
Ai 1 i b;
Ai 1 A Bi 1 ; 0 0;
i 1; 2; 3;
(25)
The iteration process is stopped when ||(N) (N 1)|| rtolerance.

It is necessary to make a note here that the problem for the solution of the linear equation system (25) is ill-conditioned
because of two reasons: first, the measured frequencies are usually contaminated with erroneousness that is able to cause
the incorrectness of the solution of the problem; second, the number of measured frequencies is always much less than the
number of the unknowns, m ! ! n that should be very large to more accurately capture the unknown crack positions over
all the beam length. The ill-posed problem can be resolved in the following manner.
Firstly, the well-known Tikhonov regularization method that suggests replacement of Eq. (25) by the regularized one is
employed
ATi 1 Ai 1 I b;
with regularization factor determined from the equation
!2
R
n
uTk b
uTk b2 2 ;

2
k 1 sk
k R1
(26)
(27)
where R, sk, uk, vk are, respectively, rank, singular values and left and right singular vectors of the matrix Ai 1, is the noise
(erroneousness) level in the measurement data, the vector b [31]. The unique root of Eq. (27), i, allows one to calculate
regularized solution of Eq. (26) as
!
R
sk uTk b
i
(28)
vk :
2
k 1 i sk
x 10
x 10
4
3.5
7
6
5
4
3
2
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
1
0
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.015
0.01
0.005
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0.2
0.5
0.02
0.1
0.4
0.03
0.025
0.3
0.03
4099
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x 10
-3

6
x 10
-3
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
0
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.03
0.025
0.4
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0.005
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
4100
Secondly, among the crack magnitudes, denoted by ^ ^ 1 ; ; ^ n T , obtained as regularized solution (28) of Eq. (25), only
the positive values are used to gather the corresponding locations e^ 1 ; ; e^ n^ that can be called herein the positively
detected crack positions (PDCPs). Such detected crack positions are taken in use as a renewed crack position mesh to build
up the matrices
nc
^ a^ 2 e^ ; B
^
b^ kj 0k e^ j ij e^ i ; e^ j 0k e^ i ^ i ;
A
kj
k0 j
i1
^
k 1; ; m; j 1; ; n:
(29)
Using the matrices (29) and repeating the iteration process (25) result in a new solution with respect to crack
magnitudes ^ 1 ; ; ^ n^ that should be enhanced with correctness because the number of unknowns is reduced n^ ! n.
This iteration process with respect to crack position mesh is sustained until the PDCPs get to be unchanged e1 ; ; enc ,
which are acknowledged as detected crack locations. Hence, the position and magnitude together with the number of actual
cracks have been found and the depth of the cracks localized at the positions e1 ; ; enc can be evaluated from the estimated
crack magnitudes 1 ; ; nc by solving the equation
5:346h=LI c a=h j ; j 1; ; nc
(30)
with respect to a and function Ic(z) given in Eq. (1). So, either locations e1 ; ; enc or depths a1 ; ; anc together also with
number nc of cracks have been identified and solution of the problem posed above is thus completed.
Note also here that to construct the matrix Ai 1 in (25) additionally the matrix must be chosen representing the
nonlinear terms included in the expression (20a). Assuming the matrix with a positive parameter and diagonal
matrix diag[1,,m] that led to the selection of the parameters and 1,,m for the matrix . The first one called
nonlinear factor is selected to adjust the nonlinearity level in general and the subsequent parameters would be selected
individually for every measured frequency dependent on the sensitivity of the frequency to the nonlinearity factor. The
selection 0 implies the use of linear approximation of the Rayleigh quotient and the positive value of the parameter
would increase the nonlinearity effect on natural frequencies. The mathematical aspect related to the selection of the
nonlinearity parameters needs to be studied in future work. In the present paper the selection is accomplished intuitively on
the basis of the numerical analysis of frequencies dependent on the nonlinear terms.
4. Numerical and experimental validation
First, the three lowest eigenvalues of a beam with single crack have been calculated by using the Rayleigh approximation,
3
Eq. (20a), for different crack depths 10, 20, and 30 percent and correcting factor k rk0
; r 0; 0:05; 0:1; 0:2; 0:5; 0:7; 1:0.
Note that the case when r 0 corresponds to the linear or first order approximation, Eq. (20b). The ratios of the eigenvalues
to the ones of the undamaged beam versus crack position along the beam length are shown in Figs. 13 in comparison with
those computed from the characteristic equation. Obviously, natural frequencies calculated by using the Rayleigh
approximations very well agreed with the solution of the characteristic equation for the crack of the depth within 20
percent. The disagreement is visibly observed for crack depth approaching 30 percent and this discrepancy gets to be more
noticeable with increasing nonlinear correcting factor in comparison with the linear one. However, for the crack depth
within 10 percent, see zoomed box in Fig. 1, the nonlinear approximation gives natural frequencies more close to solutions
of the characteristic equation with increasing the nonlinear factor. This means that for the small crack with 10 percent depth
the nonlinear terms give better approximation in calculating the natural frequencies than the linear ones. Furthermore, it
can be seen from the figures that the frequencies computed from the characteristic equation and the linear Rayleigh
approximation are a symmetrical function of crack position about the middle of the beam. This is surely the reason leading
to the nonunique solution of the crack localization in the beam with symmetrical boundary conditions based only on the
characteristic equation or the first order Rayleigh approximation. Dissimilarly to the fact, it is apparent also in the figures,
see Fig. 3 in the zoomed box, that the nonlinear approximation gives rise to unsymmetrical dependence of the frequencies
on the crack position and the asymmetry becomes more significant with increasing the nonlinear factor. It must be noted
here that although the nonlinear terms make the frequency function asymmetrical, they do not modify the frequency nodes
where the presence of a crack has no effect on the frequency. This might be important to solve the nonuniqueness problem
in crack localization in the beam using only natural frequencies.
Secondly, a clamped end beam of the parameters: L104 cm; b2 cm; h0.9 cm; 7855 kg/m3; E 2.0 1011 N/m2
with triple cracks at positions 0.2, 0.45 and 0.7 is examined. Namely, the first six natural frequencies of the beam are
computed by using Eq. (20) and the characteristic equation for equal crack depth varying from 0 percent to 50 percent.
Results of computation are shown in Fig. 4 that demonstrates also the ratio of frequencies (damaged to undamaged) versus
equal depth of the triple cracks. It can be observed from the later graphics that both the Rayleigh approximations agree well
with the characteristic equation in calculating natural frequencies for multiple cracks of depth within 20 percent. For the
cracks of depth larger than 20 percent, sensitivity of the frequencies calculated from the Rayleigh approximation gets to be
higher than the solution of the characteristic equation. It is promising to use the Rayleigh quotient for multiple cracks in the
beam.
Finally, an experiment, as shown in Fig. 5, has been carried out in the Laboratory of Structural Dynamics, IMECH-VAST to
measure natural frequencies of the beam with triple cracks that were studied above numerically. In this experiment, the
triple cracks are fabricated by saw cut with depth varying in the step of 10 percent from 0 percent to 50 percent. Scenarios of
4101
Table 2
Numerical results of crack detection.
Actual crack scenarios
Estimated crack parameters
0.4510%
(Single crack)
Number of detected cracks

Position of detected cracks
Depth of detected cracks
0.20.45
10% 10%
(Double crack)
0.20.450.7
(1010 10)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(1020 10)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(2020 10)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(2020 20)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(2030 20)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(3030 20)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(3030 30)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(303040)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(3040 40)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(4040 40)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(50 40 40)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(5050 40)%
(Triple crack)
0.20.450.7
(5050 50)%
(Triple crack)
0.45
0.1068
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2001
0.2
0.2001
0.2
0.2001
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4003
0.2
0.4997
0.2
0.4997
0.2
0.4997
2
0.5
2.24e-5
2
0.45
0.1
3
0.45
0.1
3
0.45
0.2001
3
0.45
0.2001
3
0.45
0.2001
3
0.45
0.3
3
0.45
0.3
3
0.45
0.3
3
0.45
0.3
3
0.45
0.4003
3
0.45
0.4003
3
0.45
0.4003
3
0.45
0.4997
3
0.45
0.4997
0.7
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.7
0.2001
0.7
0.2001
0.7
0.2001
0.7
0.3
0.7
0.4003
0.7
0.4003
0.7
0.4003
0.7
0.4003
0.7
0.4003
0.7
0.4997
crack depth used for either computation or experimentation are given in Table 1 that include the case of single and double
crack.
The Multi Channel Signal Acquisition System PULSE 3060 is employed with one channel used for the impact hammer and
another channel used to measure the acceleration. In order to gather data, an accelerometer was roving through 9 points:
6.25 cm, 10 cm, 12.5 cm, 16.7 cm, 25.1 cm, 30 cm, 31.25 cm, 37.5 cm and 50.2 cm from the right end, while the impact
excitation was applied at the point opposite to the accelerometer. The frequency response functions gathered from every
measurement were collected and employed for extracting natural frequencies using the software ME'SCOPE 5.0. The first
six measured natural frequencies are presented in Table 1 in comparison with those calculated by using the Rayleigh
quotient given by Eq. (20) and the characteristic Eq. [17]. The obtained results show good agreement of the lowest three
frequencies calculated by using the Rayleigh quotient and the characteristic equation with the experiment for the crack
depth to 50 percent beam thickness. Disagreement is observed for higher frequencies and this deviation increases with
crack depth that implies high sensitivity of frequencies calculated by using the Rayleigh approximation to crack depth.
The natural frequencies measured in the experiment are taken as input for multiple crack detection by using the
procedure proposed in the previous section. This is aimed to verify applicability of the Rayleigh quotient not only in modal
analysis of cracked beam but also for crack detection problem. For the purpose, the natural frequencies measured in the
experiment are taken in use for solving the diagnostic Eqs. (23)(30) solutions of which are shown in Figs. 620 for different
cases of crack depth scenarios. In each figure there are given typical four iterations leading to the final result given in the last
box. To illustrate the difference between linear and nonlinear approximations, the chart given in the first box is the result of
4102
the first iteration obtained with initial 20 positions mesh and zero nonlinear factor ( 0), i.e., linear approximation.
Therefore, symmetrical positions of cracks detected at the first iteration are apparent. However, the symmetry in the result
of crack localization in subsequent iterations with positive nonlinear factor starting from the second one is immediately
eliminated. The number of frequencies used for the crack detection procedure needs to be not less than 6 to faithfully
estimate the crack magnitude. The numerical results including depth, location and number of detected cracks evaluated
from the chart in the last box of the figures and Eq. (30) are tabulated in Table 2. It is obviously that multiple cracks could be
truthfully identified from only natural frequencies by using obtained in the present paper Rayleigh quotient.
5. Conclusion
In the present paper, the so-called Rayleigh quotient is derived for a clamped end beam with arbitrary number of cracks.
Comparing natural frequencies calculated by using the Rayleigh quotient to those computed from the characteristic
equation and measured in an experiment, it can be concluded that the obtained herein Rayleigh formulae provide a simple
and consistent tool for modal analysis of cracked structures. Moreover, since the Rayleigh quotient has been obtained in an
explicit expression of natural frequencies in terms of crack parameters, it is straightforward to develop a new procedure for
crack detection from only measured natural frequencies. The procedure consists of iteratively estimating unknown
magnitudes of cracks assumed to be at a grid of positions in the beam that is called crack scanning mesh. Since the
nonlinear terms with respect to crack magnitude have been incorporated in the explicit expression of natural frequencies,
the approach to the crack detection makes it possible to really overcome the non-uniqueness problem of crack localization
in the beam with symmetrical boundary conditions using only measured natural frequencies. Nevertheless, the question
how the nonlinear regularization factor is chosen to obtain a unique solution of the crack detection should be further
investigated. Usefulness of the developed herein technique in structural damage detection based on measurement of natural
frequencies has been validated by an experimental study on a beam with fixed ends.
Acknowledgment
The authors are pleased to thank the NAFOSTED of Vietnam for support under Grant number 107.04.12.09 in completing
this paper.
References
[1] S.W. Doebling, C.R. Farrar, M.B. Prime, D.W. Shevitz, Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical systems from changes
in their vibration characteristics: a literature review, Los Alamos National Laboratory Report, LA-13070-MS, 1996.
[2] H. Sohn, C.R. Farrar, F.M. Hemez, D.D. Shunk, D.W. Stinemates, B.R. Nadler, J.J. Czarnecki, A review of structural health monitoring literature: 1996
2001, Los Alamos National Laboratory Report, LA-1396-MS, 2004.
[3] Q. Fan, P. Qiao, Vibration-based damage identification methods: a review and comparative study, Structural Health Monitoring 10 (10) (2011) 83111.
[4] P. Cawley, R.D. Adams, The location of defects in structures from measurements of natural frequencies, Journal of Strain Analysis 14 (2) (1979) 4957.
[5] O.S. Salawu, Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review, Engineering Structures 19 (9) (1997) 718723.
[6] R. Ruotolo, C. Surace, Damage assessment of multiple cracked beams: numerical results and experimental validation, Journal of Sound and Vibration
206 (4) (1997) 567588.
[7] A. Morassi, M. Rollo, Identification of two cracks in a simply supported beam from minimal frequency measurements, Journal of Vibration and Control 7
(5) (2001) 729740.
[8] N.T. Khiem, T.V. Lien, Multi-crack detection for beam by the natural frequencies, Journal of Sound and Vibration 273 (2004) 175184.
[9] X. Zhang, Q. Han, F. Li, Analytical approach for detection of multiple cracks in a beam, Journal of Engineering Mechanics 136 (3) (2010) 345357.
[10] M. Dilena, A. Morassi, Reconstruction method for damage detection in beams based on natural frequency and antiresonant frequency measurements,
ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics 136 (3) (2010) 329344.
[11] F.B. Sayyad, B. Kumar, Identification of crack location and size in a simply supported beam by measurement of natural frequencies, Journal of Vibration
and Control 18 (2) (2012) 183190.
[12] R.D. Adams, P. Cawley, C.J. Pye, B.J. Stone, Vibration technique for non-destructively assessing the integrity of structures, Journal of Mechanical
Engineering Science 20 (2) (1978) 94101.
[13] W.M. Ostanchowicz, M. Krawczuk, Analysis of the effect of cracks on the natural frequencies of a cantilever beam, Journal of Sound and Vibration 150
(2) (1991) 191201.
[14] R.Y. Liang, J. Hu, F. Choy, Theoretical study of crack-induced eigenfrequency change on beam structures, Journal of Engineering Mechanics 118 (2) (1992)
384395.
[15] Y. Narkis, Identification of crack location in vibrating simply supported beams, Journal of Sound and Vibration 172 (1994) 549558.
[16] E.I. Shifrin, R. Ruotolo, Natural frequencies of a beam with an arbitrary number of cracks, Journal of Sound and Vibration 222 (3) (1999) 409423.
[17] N.T. Khiem, T.V. Lien, A simplified method for natural frequency analysis of multiple cracked beam, Journal of Sound and Vibration 245 (4) (2001)
737751.
[18] Q.S. Li, Vibratory characteristics of multi-step beams with an arbitrary number of cracks and concentrated masses, Applied Acoustics 62 (2001)
691706.
[19] S. Caddemi, I. Cali, Exact closed-form solution for the vibration mode of the EulerBernoulli beam with multiple open cracks, Journal of Sound and
Vibration 327 (35) (2009) 473489.
[20] K. Aydin, Vibratory characteristics of EulerBernoulli beams with an arbitrary number of cracks subjected to axial load, Journal of Vibration and Control
14 (4) (2008) 485510.
[21] A. Morassi, Crack-induced changes in eigenparameters of beam structures, Journal of Engineering Mechanics 119 (9) (1993) 17981803.
[22] L. Rubio, An efficient method for crack identification in simply supported EulerBernoulli beams, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 131 (2009) 16.
(051001).
[23] J. Lee, Identification of multiple cracks in beam using natural frequencies, Journal of Sound and Vibration 320 (2009) 482490.
4103
[24] R.Y. Liang, J. Hu, F. Choy, Quantitative NDE technique for assessing damages in beam structures, Journal of Engineering Mechanics 118 (7) (1992)
14681487.
[25] D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti, Detection of multiple cracks using frequency measurements, Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (12) (2003) 15531572.
[26] A. Maghsoodi, A. Ghadami, H.R. Mirdamadi, Multiple crack damage detection in multi-step beams by a novel local flexibility-based damage index,
Journal of Sound and Vibration 332 (2013) 294305.
[27] M.H.H. Shen, C. Pierre, Natural modes of BernoulliEuler beams with symmetric cracks, Journal of Sound and Vibration 138 (1) (1990) 115134.
[28] J. Fernandez-Saez, L. Rubio, C. Navarro, Approximate calculation of the fundamental frequency for bending vibrations of cracked beam, Journal of
Sound and Vibration 225 (2) (1999) 345352.
[29] J. Fernandez-Saez, C. Navarro, Fundamental frequency of cracked beams in bending vibrations: an analytical approach, Journal of Sound and Vibration
256 (1) (2002) 1731.
[30] T. Zheng, T. Ji, An approximate method for determining the static deflection and natural frequency of a cracked beam, Journal of Sound and Vibration
331 (2012) 26542670.
[31] N.T. Khiem, T.H. Tran, A procedure for multiple crack identification in beam-like structure from natural vibration mode, Journal of Vibration and Control
(2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.117/1077546312470478. (Online First Version, SAGE).

A Novel Method Crack Detection Beam Like Structures Measurements Natural Frequencies

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Novel Method Crack Detection Beam Like Structures Measurements Natural Frequencies

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Journal of Sound and Vibration 333 (2014) 40844103

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Sound and Vibration

A novel method for crack detection in beam-like structures

I c z 1:8624z2 3:95z3 16:375z4 37:226z5 76:81z6 126:9z7 172z8 143:97z9 66:56z10 ;

and boundary conditions

Ratio of first eigenvalue

Crack position along beam length

Ratio of second eigenvalue

Crack position along beam length

Ratio of Third eigenvalue

Crack position along beam length

and, consequently, Eq. (5) can be rewritten as

Akj Ak1 ; Bkj Bk1 ; C kj C k1 i k ei ;

Fig. 5. Experimental model for modal testing fixedfixed beam.

(0100)% (Single crack)

(10100)% (Double crack)

(1010 10)% (Triple crack)

(102010)% (Triple crack)

(202010)% (Triple crack)

(202020)% (Triple crack)

(203020)% (Triple crack)

(303020)% (Triple crack)

(303030)% (Triple crack)

(303040)% (Triple crack)

(304040)% (Triple crack)

(404040)% (Triple crack)

(504040)% (Triple crack)

(505040)% (Triple crack)

(505050)% (Triple crack)

Bk1 j 3ej 2k ej :

Therefore, the numerator of quotient (8) becomes

21 i j ij 0k ei k0 ej ; ji 6ei ej 15ei ej 4;

On the other hand,

where the following notations have been introduced

Ak1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj 2 dx

0k xAk1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj dx

C kj x Dkj 2 dx 2Ak1 x3 Bk1 x2 C kj x Dkj

A2k1 Ak1 Bk1 B2k1 C k;n 1

C k;n 1 Dk;n 1 D2k;n 1

17=21 717ej =140 153e2j =35 e3j =3 e4j =6 e5j =10;

2=15 43ej ei =40 ej ei 2 ei ej =2 1 2ej 1 2ei =7 3ej 23ei 2=5

Ak1 j 1 2ej k ej j 1 2ej 0k ej ;

Finally, the quotient (8) in this case can be written as

then expanding the function in Taylor series one obtains

The First iteration - Linear model

The 6th iteration - Nonlinear mode

The 8th iteration - Nonlinear model

The 9th iteration - Linear model

The first iteration - Linear model

The 4th iteration - Nonlinear model

Estimated crack magnitude

Estimated crack magnitude

Scanning crack position

The 12th iteration - Linear model

Estimated crack magnitude

Estimated crack magnitude

Scanning crack position

The 10th iteration - Nonlinear model

Scanning crack position

Scanning crack position

The first iteration - Linear model

Estimated crack magnitude

Estimated crack magnitude