Coverage intensity of optimal sensors for common, isolated, and integrated steel structures using novel approach of FEM-MAC-TTFD

The coverage intensity of sensors is the most important issue on structural health monitoring technique. The geometric configuration of sensors must be optimized based on coverage intensity with proper objectives. In this article, a novel algorithm for optimal sensor placement in various steel frames was evaluated. These frames including moment-resisting frame, moment-resisting frame with base isolation, and moment-resisting frame with base isolation with steel shear wall were selected for case studies. This approach was proposed based on combination of common optimal sensor placement algorithm and nonlinear time history analysis. A new method called transformed time history to frequency domain approach was evaluated to transform nonlinear time history analysis results to frequency domain and then the effective frequencies according the maximum range of Fourier amplitude were selected. The modified type of modal assurance criterion values can be achieved from modal assurance criterion with the exact seismic displacement. All of novel optimal sensor placement processes were done through FEM-MAC-TTFD code modeled and developed in MATLAB by authors of this article. The results show that there is good relative correlation between the sensors number and coverage intensity obtained with modal and modified modal assurance criterion approaches for moment-resisting frame system, but for integrated frame such as moment-resisting frame with base isolation and moment-resisting frame with base isolation with steel shear wall, the modified modal assurance criterion approach is better approach. There is no significant difference between coverage intensity of sensors for top joints between modal assurance criterion and modified modal assurance criterion approaches for moment-resisting frame, moment-resisting frame with base isolation, and moment-resisting frame with base isolation with steel shear wall systems ( R 2 = 0.994, 0.986, and 0.724, respectively). It was found that if reference point is located in center of frame, there is significant difference between modal assurance criterion and modified modal assurance criterion approaches, and modified modal assurance criterion generated slightly better results.