DAMAGE IDENTIFICATION IN A STRUCTURAL BEAM

USING REGRESSION AND MACHINE LEARNING MODELS

GROUP MEMBERS :
1. Shreyash Santosh Sagvekar
2. Omkar Ravindra Burate
3. Yash Jagannath Morvekar
4. Devavrat Devdatta Devlatkar

PROJECT GUIDE :
Dr. V. Khalkar
FINAL YEAR / MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT
GHARDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, LAVEL
 TABLE OF CONTENTs

SR. NO. CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. OBJECTIVES

3. LITERATURE SURVEY

4. RESEARCH GAP

5. FEA MODELING AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

6. REGRESSION MODEL DATA AND RESULTS

7. MACHINE LEARNING MODEL DATA AND RESULTS

8. APPLICATION

9. CONCLUSION
 Introduction

“Damage Identification in a structural beam using a regression and Machine

Learning”

Identification of crack and their corresponding parameter.

Regression techniques and advanced machine learning model.

Beam’s natural frequency and the characteristics of the crack.

Accurately detect and quantify the presence of cracks, including their dimension
and other defining attribute.
 Objectives
1. To study effect of damage severity on bending natural frequencies.

2. The Regression and Machine Learning Models will be trained using

Numerical and Experimental data sets

3. To Predict damage parameter location and depth using the

Regression and Machine Learning models

4. To find mean square error and standard deviation considering

Regression model and Machine Learning model
 Literature Survey
Pape Author Paper Name Work Finding
r no.

1. V. Khalkar , Some Studies Verify the • Impact of arbitrary and unpredictable flaw Natural frequencies drop as the
Pon.hariharasakth- Applicability of the Free geometry on these approaches' applicability has composite beams'
isudhan & Vibration Method of Crack yet to be observed. crack depth rises. A maximum
R. Kalamkar Detection in Composite • Using ANSYS software, FEA simulations were difference of 1.815 percent was
[August - 2023] Beams for Different Crack carried out on the new and V-shaped crack models found
Geometries for the natural frequencies. when comparing the finite
element natural frequency
findings from the new and V-
shaped crack models for
the same configurations

2. V. Khalkar & ANN model was used for • Delamination is typical damage in the Fiber Metal Machine learning approaches
S. Ramachandran predicting the crack Laminate composite structures, usually hidden has been made for detecting
[August - 2023] locations and crack depths from the outer side that can reduce the structural crack location , depth
in beams, i.e., V-shaped stiffness.
cracked beams and a • Used a machine-learning and regression model to
combination of determine the locations and severity of the
rectangular and V-shaped delamination in the Fiber Metal laminate cantilever
(new crack model) cracked beams. Dataset related to delamination location,
beams. severity, and bending natural frequencies was
obtained using the Finite Element Analysis
 Literature Survey
Paper Author Paper Name
no.
3. V. Khalkar & The effect of crack
S. Ramachandran geometry on non-
[March – 2019] destructive fault detection
of EN 8 and EN 47 cracked
cantilever beam
4. V. Khalkar, P. Oak Crack Detection in A
& R. Bane Cantilever Beam Using
[March - 2023] Correlation Model and
Machine Learning
Approach
Working
• It is crucial to do the vibration study of
cracked structures with regard to vibration-
based crack detection and the classification
of cracks.
• By free vibration analysis, the effect of crack
geometry, crack depth, and crack location on
natural frequency is investigated.
• Correlation model is developed to detect
crack parameters to crack location and crack
depth in the beam To evaluate the ethenity of
the developed correlation model, the
Artificial Intelligence-based approach is used
to predict the crack parameters. Twenty-three
Artificial Intelligence algorithms were used to
predict the locations and depths of the crack
ma cantilever beam.
Finding
Irrespective of the Crack Geometry
Free vibration based crack detection
method can satisfactorily predict the
location and depth of the crack
Inverse method of crack detection in
beam(Crack locations and depth) with
correlation model and Machine
learning Approach js used.
The Artificial neural network (ANN)
model is more accurate than other
machine learning models at predicting
The crack locations and depth.
 Literature Survey
Paper Author Paper Name Working Finding
no.
5. S. Ramachandran Comparative vibration • Systematic study on the free vibration of Euler- Numerical analysis using ANSYS
[February - 2017] study of EN 8 and EN 47 Bernoulli beam containing open edge transverse software is been for calculating
cracked cantilever beam cracks. the effect of topside and bottom
•Two springs steel materials (EN 8 and EN 47) are side cracks on cantilever beam
considered.
•The effect of the top side cracks and bottom side
cracks on the natural frequency of a cantilever
beam is discussed.
•The natural frequency of a cracked case cantilever
beam is investigated numerically using FE analysis
software ANSYS.
6. Luay Alansari Calculating of natural This study examines three models—Rayleigh, modified Results indicate that increasing the
[January- 2012] Rayleigh, and Finite Elements (ANSYS)—to calculate the width of both small and large parts of
frequency of stepping natural frequency of a cantilever stepping beam the beam raises the natural frequency.
cantilever beam compound. Comparisons reveal the modified Rayleigh Additionally, lengthening the larger
model closely aligns with the ANSYS model. The width enhances frequency until
investigation assesses the impact of beam width variations reaching 0.52 meters, after which a
and step length on natural frequency. decline is observed using the modified
Rayleigh or ANSYS models. This
highlights the importance of
considering beam geometry in
predicting natural frequencies
accurately.
 Literature Survey
Pape Author Paper Name Working Finding
r no.
7. S. Ramachandran The effect of crack geometry In this paper it is crucial to do the vibration study of •Free vibration methods can
[April - 2018] on stiffness of spring steel cracked beams in regard of free vibration-based effectively predict crack
cantilever beam crack detection and its crack classification. Until now location and depth, and that
the vibration-based nondestructive testing methods vibration monitoring can
are applied to many spring steel cracked cantilever complement finite element
beams for its possible crack detection. However, the analysis for assessing
effect of various kinds of practical cracks, structural damage.

8. Damir hodzic Bending analysis of cantilever The finite element method (FEM) is a crucial •The finite element method
[January- 2022] beam in finite element numerical technique for solving complex engineering (FEM) resolves complex
method and physics problems. Analytical solutions are engineering challenges by
impractical for scenarios with complex geometries, dissecting structures into finite
diverse loads, and varied materials. FEM discretizes elements, providing vital insights
structures into finite elements interconnected at into their behavior and physical
nodes, allowing the formulation of algebraic phenomena. FEM yields valuable
equations and providing approximate solutions for data on displacements, stresses,
specific points within the structure. Its versatility and temperature distribution
spans across scientific and technical disciplines, induced by external loads. Its
facilitating efficient numerical solutions for a wide versatility spans beyond
range of problems. structural analysis, enabling
researchers to make informed
decisions in designing and
optimizing various systems.
 Research Gap

Based upon the survey of various research project, we found that multiple
research on analysis of cracks in cantilever beam over regression model were done with
minimal number of approaches as well as neural network models are new approaches which
were only used for introductory purpose. Here, we have provided procedural analysis over
crack detection in cantilever beam through various given approaches given below:

1. Experimental Analysis
2. Regression Analysis
3. Machine Learning Analysis

Through these approaches, based on results of different method, we have also

provided optimal approach and conclusion for detection of crack in cantilever beam
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
ANSYS SOFTWARE
PURPOSE : TO FIND NATURAL FREQUENCY AT DIFFERENT MODES
 Experimental analysis
FEA modeling
ANSYS Software would be used experimental analysis
 Experimental analysis
FFT analyzing

FFT
ANALYSE
R
VIBRATION
SENSOR

STRIKING
CRACK HAMMER
CRACK
LENGT
DEPTH
H
BEAM LENGTH

Fig. Experimental analysis

REGRESSION ANALYSIS
STATISTICAL APPROACH
PURPOSE : TO PREDICT CRACK LOCATION AND DEPTH
 Regression analysis
Data Table
Sr.no. Crack Crack clr cdr f1 f2
location Depth
1 50 1.5 0.125 0.09375 0.994732 0.998736

2 50 3 0.125 0.1875 0.98137 0.995606

3 50 4.5 0.125 0.28125 0.957565 0.990174

4 50 6 0.125 0.375 0.922616 0.982574

5 50 7.5 0.125 0.46875 0.873318 0.972578

6 50 9 0.125 0.5625 0.804662 0.959943

7 50 10.5 0.125 0.65625 0.704929 0.944063

8 50 12 0.125 0.75 0.574915 0.92724

9 100 1.5 0.25 0.09375 0.996703 0.999925

10 100 3 0.25 0.1875 0.987857 0.999642

11 100 4.5 0.25 0.28125 0.972535 0.999095

12 100 6 0.25 0.375 0.949423 0.998208

13 100 7.5 0.25 0.46875 0.913582 0.996813

14 100 9 0.25 0.5625 0.862818 0.99487

15 100 10.5 0.25 0.65625 0.78202 0.991853

16 100 12 0.25 0.75 0.66003 0.987591

 Regression analysis
Data Table
Sr.no. Crack Crack clr cdr f1 f2
location Depth
17 200 1.5 0.5 0.09375 0.999155 0.996322

18 200 3 0.5 0.1875 0.996856 0.986591

19 200 4.5 0.5 0.28125 0.992644 0.969599

20 200 6 0.5 0.375 0.985488 0.942762

21 200 7.5 0.5 0.46875 0.974553 0.906043

22 200 9 0.5 0.5625 0.956803 0.855481

23 200 10.5 0.5 0.65625 0.923859 0.782231

24 200 12 0.5 0.75 0.858747 0.685369

25 300 1.5 0.75 0.09375 0.999998 0.998699

26 300 3 0.75 0.1875 0.999989 0.995172

27 300 4.5 0.75 0.28125 0.999988 0.988835

28 300 6 0.75 0.375 0.999589 0.978331

29 300 7.5 0.75 0.46875 0.99885 0.961697

30 300 9 0.75 0.5625 0.997395 0.933841

31 300 10.5 0.75 0.65625 0.99431 0.882468

32 300 12 0.75 0.75 0.987529 0.791076

 Regression analysis
For Analysis purpose we will use FFT Analyzer , Accelerometer ,
Impact Hammer, Specimen Holder and similar other Kind of
Acessories.

Source Sequential Lack of Fit Adjusted Predicted

P-value p-value R2 R2
Linear <0.0001 0.6591 0.6072
2FI <0.0001 0.8880 0.8639
Quadratic <0.0001 0.9609 0.9463
Cubic <0.0001 0.9968 0.9951
Quartic <0.0001 0.9989 0.9964
Fifth <0.0001 0.9998 0.9985 Suggested
Sixth <0.0001 1.0000 0.9996 Aliased
 Actual Equation
Y1= +0.976826 - 0.148237*x1 - 0.331548* x2 +0.088862* x1 * x2
+0.462734*x12-1.34457* x22 -0.633347* x12 *x2 +1.70662*x1 * x22-0.312755 *
x13-x
Y2= +0.753154+2.457910 *x1 +0.129587 *x2 -0.846657*x1 *x2
-6.38478*x12 +0.066217*x22 +1.59977*x12 *x2 -1.20417*x1 *x22 +4.63947*x13 -x

Fit Statistics
Parameters Value Parameters Value
Std. Dev. 0.0265 R2 0.9156

Mean 0.9383 Adjusted R2 0.8956

C.v.% 2.82 Predicted R2 0.8351

Adeq Precision 27.1864

Statistical Graphs
 Regression Analysis
Result Table

Actual Crack Ratio Predicted Crack Ratio Errror

Location Depth Location Depth Location Depth

0.125 0.1875 0.1486 0.235 -18.88 -25.33
0.125 0.375 0.134 0.393 -7.20 -4.80
0.125 0.5625 0.105 0.5419 16.00 3.66
0.25 0.28125 0.338 0.358 -35.20 -27.29
0.25 0.46875 0.259 0.466 -3.60 0.59
0.25 0.65625 0.192 0.5174 23.20 21.16
0.5 0.1875 0.4198 0.267 16.04 -42.40
0.5 0.375 0.4607 0.3828 7.86 -2.08
0.5 0.5625 0.5204 0.5483 -4.08 2.52
0.5 0.75 0.5318 0.8062 -6.36 -7.49
 Regression Analysis
Result Graphs

Crack Location Ratio Result Crack Depth Ratio Result

0.6 0.9

0.8
0.5
0.7

0.4 0.6

0.5
0.3
0.4

0.2 0.3

0.2
0.1
0.1
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Predicted Crack Location Ratio Actual Crack Location Ratio Predicted Crack Depth Ratio Actual Crack Depth Ratio
MACHINE LEARNING ANALYSIS
ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK
PURPOSE : TO PREDICT CRACK LOCATION AND DEPTH
 Artificial Neural Network analysis
Data Table
Sr.no. Crack Crack clr cdr f1 f2 f3
location Depth
1 50 1.5 0.125 0.09375 0.994732 0.998736 1

2 50 3 0.125 0.1875 0.98137 0.995606 1

3 50 4.5 0.125 0.28125 0.957565 0.990174 0.999864

4 50 6 0.125 0.375 0.922616 0.982574 0.999727

5 50 7.5 0.125 0.46875 0.873318 0.972578 0.999387

6 50 9 0.125 0.5625 0.804662 0.959943 0.998842

7 50 10.5 0.125 0.65625 0.704929 0.944063 0.998024

8 50 12 0.125 0.75 0.574915 0.92724 0.996934

9 100 1.5 0.25 0.09375 0.996703 0.999925 0.997751

10 100 3 0.25 0.1875 0.987857 0.999642 0.991346

11 100 4.5 0.25 0.28125 0.972535 0.999095 0.980444

12 100 6 0.25 0.375 0.949423 0.998208 0.964295

13 100 7.5 0.25 0.46875 0.913582 0.996813 0.940243

14 100 9 0.25 0.5625 0.862818 0.99487 0.908422

15 100 10.5 0.25 0.65625 0.78202 0.991853 0.862974

16 100 12 0.25 0.75 0.66003 0.987591 0.806419

 Artificial Neural Network analysis
Data Table
Sr.no. Crack Crack clr cdr f1 f2 f3
location Depth
17 200 1.5 0.5 0.09375 0.999155 0.996322 1

18 200 3 0.5 0.1875 0.996856 0.986591 0.999932

19 200 4.5 0.5 0.28125 0.992644 0.969599 0.999864

20 200 6 0.5 0.375 0.985488 0.942762 0.999796

21 200 7.5 0.5 0.46875 0.974553 0.906043 0.999591

22 200 9 0.5 0.5625 0.956803 0.855481 0.99925

23 200 10.5 0.5 0.65625 0.923859 0.782231 0.998842

24 200 12 0.5 0.75 0.858747 0.685369 0.99816

25 300 1.5 0.75 0.09375 0.999998 0.998699 0.996252

26 300 3 0.75 0.1875 0.999989 0.995172 0.986168

27 300 4.5 0.75 0.28125 0.999988 0.988835 0.968656

28 300 6 0.75 0.375 0.999589 0.978331 0.941673

29 300 7.5 0.75 0.46875 0.99885 0.961697 0.90338

30 300 9 0.75 0.5625 0.997395 0.933841 0.850027

31 300 10.5 0.75 0.65625 0.99431 0.882468 0.777392

32 300 12 0.75 0.75 0.987529 0.791076 0.697193

 Artificial Neural Network analysis
Result Table

Actual Crack Ratio Predicted Crack Ratio Errror

Location Depth Location Depth Location Depth

0.125 0.1875 0.1453 0.1851 -16.24 1.28
0.125 0.375 0.1195 0.3847 4.40 -2.59
0.125 0.5625 0.1438 0.5449 -15.04 3.13
0.25 0.28125 0.2603 0.2791 -4.12 0.76
0.25 0.46875 0.2504 0.4748 -0.16 -1.29
0.25 0.65625 0.2323 0.65 7.08 0.95
0.5 0.1875 0.4978 0.1762 0.44 6.03
0.5 0.375 0.5579 0.382 -11.58 -1.87
0.5 0.5625 0.4605 0.6035 7.90 -7.29
0.5 0.75 0.5064 0.7389 -1.28 1.48
 Artificial Neural Network analysis
Result Graphs

Crack Location Ratio Result Crack Depth Ratio Result

0.6 0.8
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.3 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Predicted Crack Location Ratio Actuak Crack Location Ratio Predicted Crack Depth Ratio Actual Crack Depth Ratio
 Error Graphs

Crack Location Result Error Crack Depth Result Error

30.00 30.00

20.00 20.00

10.00
10.00
0.00
0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -10.00
-10.00
-20.00
-20.00
-30.00

-30.00 -40.00

-40.00 -50.00

Regression Error ANN Error Regression Error ANN Error

 Application

• Crack detection in aero plane wings

• Crack detection in complex infra-structures

• Crack detection in frequency operated industrial products

• Crack detection Factory structures

• Crack Detection in Pipelines

• Crack Detection in Nuclear Power Plants

 Conclusion

• The study focuses on identifying structural beam damage

through regression and advanced Machine Learning techniques.
• Emphasis on accurate crack identification, including depth and
location, utilizing beam natural frequency and crack
characteristics.
• Achieved objectives: studied experimental analysis for crack
detection, predicted parameters via regression and Machine
Learning, and conducted error analysis.
• Comprehensive approach highlights the research's significance
in enhancing structural safety and understanding crack detection
methodologies.
 References
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/373069873_Some_Studies_Verify_the_Applicability_of_the_Free_Vibratio
n_Method_of_Crack_Detection_in_Composite_Beams_for_Different_Crack_Geometries
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/331659826_The_effect_of_crack_geometry_on_non-destructive_fault_dete
ction_of_EN_8_and_EN_47_cracked_cantilever_beam
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/369335127_Crack_Detection_in_A_Cantilever_Beam_Using_Correlation_
Model_and_Machine_Learning_Approach
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/313746497_Comparative_vibration_study_of_EN_8_and_EN_47_cracked
_cantilever_beam
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/287394710_Calculating_of_natural_frequency_of_stepping_cantilever_bea
m
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/324240103_The_effect_of_crack_geometry_on_stiffness_of_spring_steel_
cantilever_beam
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/357887609_BENDING_ANALYSIS_OF_CANTILEVER_BEAM_IN_FIN
ITE_ELEMENT_METHOD
• https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/315912152_Free_vibration_study_of_v-shape_and_rectangular_shape_dou
ble-sided_cracks_in_a_cantilever_beam
THANK YOU….