Location Optimization of Wireless Sensor Networks in Specific To Structural Health Monitoring Systems

ISSN (ONLINE): 2454-9762
ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762
Available online at www.ijarmate.com

International Journal of Advanced Research in Management, Architecture,
Engineering (IJARMATE)
Vol. 1, Issue 3, October 2015
Technology and
Location Optimization Of Wireless Sensor Networks

In Specific to Structural Health Monitoring Systems
S.Surya1, Dr.D.C.Joy Winnie Wise2
P.G. Scholars, Department of CSE, Francis Xavier Engineering College, Tirunelveli 1
Prof and Head, Department of CSE, Francis Xavier Engineering College, Tirunelveli2
Abstractthere has been a rapid advancement in wireless sensor

network (WSN) technology in the past few years and its
applicationin structural monitoring has been the focus of several
research projects. Starting from petroleum exploration, mining,
weather and even battle operations, all of theserequire sensor
applications. One reason behind the growing popularity of
wireless sensors is thatthey can work in remote areas without
manual intervention. All the user needs to do is to gatherthe data
sent by the sensors, and with certain analysis extract meaningful
information from them.Usually sensor applications involve many
sensors deployed together. These sensors form anetwork and
collaborate with each other to gather data and send it to the base
station. The basestation acts as the control centre where the data
from the sensors are gathered for further analysisand processing.
In a nutshell, a wireless sensor network (WSN) is a wireless
network consistingof spatially distributed nodes which use
sensors to monitor physical or environmental conditions.These
nodes combine with routers and gateways to create a WSN
system. The evaluation of the newly developed sensor system is
an important aspect of such research efforts. Although much of
this evaluation is donein the laboratories and using generic signal
processing techniques, it is important to validate the system for
its intendedapplication as well. In this paper the performance of
a newly developed sensor is evaluated by usingthe data specimen
with a local damage detection algorithm.According to
deployment methodsfrom civil/structural/mechanicalengineering,
wired sensors are usually deployed at strategic locations to
achieve the best Estimates of structural health status. To prolong
the WSN lifetime, the energy cost of each sensor for monitoring
must be carefully considered.
An energy-efficient SHM
(Structural Health Monitoring) algorithm, called DamageIndicator is proposed; it runs on each sensor and then provides a
light-weighted indication of damage in a cluster in a
decentralized manner. If there is no indication found in the
cluster, the uninteresting data transmission toward the BS can
be reduced. Also, it is used to prevent the path in WSN by
calculating residual energy of the nodes.The collected data from
the sensors is then used to estimate two sets of system influence
coefficients with the wired one as thereference baseline. The
performance of the WSN is evaluated by comparing the quality
of the influence coefficients andthe rate of convergence of the
estimated parameters.
KeywordsSHM(Structural Health Monitoring), Wireless
Sensor Networks, Energy Optimization, Damage Detection
III.
INTRODUCTION
The deterioration of our civil infrastructure is a growing

Problem both around the world. For example, during their
lifetimes, bridges suffer from environmentalcorrosion,
persistent traffic and wind loading, extreme earthquakeevents,
material aging, etc., which inevitably result in structural
deficiencies. According to the American Societyfor Civil
Engineers 2009 Report Card for America's Infrastructure,
more than 26%, or one in four, of the American
nation'sbridges were either structurally deficient or
functionally obsolete". Our damage facing civil infrastructure
faces the critical challenge of long-term structural health
monitoring for damage detection and localization. In contrast
to existing research that often separates the designs of wireless
sensor networksand structural engineering algorithms; this
paper proposes a co-design approach to structural health
monitoring based on wireless sensor networks. Our approach
closely
integrates
(1)
flexible-based
damage
localizationmethods that allow a tradeoff between the number
of sensors and the resolution of damage localization, and (2)
an energy-efficient, multi-level computing architecture
specially designed to leverage the multi-resolution feature of
the flexible-based approach. The proposed approach has been
simulated and the simulations demonstrate the system's
efficiency in damage localization and energy efficiency. What
is needed is a fundamentally different approach which
considers both the constraints of the underlyingWSN system
(the cyber components) and the SHMrequirements (the
physical components) in its numerical approach.This can be
achieved by leveraging the increasinglypowerful processing
capability of wireless sensor \motes" topartially process
locally-collected
data,
extracting
(and
subsequentlyexchanging) only the important features
relevantfor SHM. Several recent studies demonstrate the
potentialfor distributed SHM approaches to significantly
reduce energycost through localized data processing. In this
paper, we present a hierarchical decentralized SHM system
that implements a exibile-based damage identification and
localization method. In contrast to previousdecentralized
algorithms like DLAC, exible-based methods explicitly
All Rights Reserved 2015 IJARMATE

19

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

correlate data across multiple sensors, allowing them to

accurately identify and localize damage ona wider rangeof
Figure 1.1: The Traditional method based on flexible

structures. Our hierarchical system organizesnodes into
clusters using a novel multi-level search approachthat
incrementally activates sensors in the damagedtake advantage
of the platform's computationalpower to perform in-network
processing whereverpossible; thus, nodes further save energy
and bandwidth byonly transmitting the intermediate results
related to the exible calculation. In this paper, we make the
following contributions and wepropose a architecture which
efficiently maps exibile-based damage identification and
localization methodsonto a distributed WSN, demonstrating
that our approach can successfullylocalize damage on both
structures to the resolutionof a single element. Latency and
power consumption datacollected during these experiments
also demonstrate the energy efficiency of our
approach.Wedescribes related SHM systems in literature and
also we discuss the basic numerical methods used by
ourexible-based damage localization. Then we present
ourmapping of these methods into an efficient distributed
architecture.
I.
LOCATING DAMAGES
A. Damage Identification Approach

In this section, we introduce the physical (structural
engineering)aspects
of
our
decentralized
damage
localizationsystem. Our system is based on a family of
damage localizationtechniques collectively known as exible
based algorithms. The intuition behind these methods is that
structureswill ex slightly when a force is applied, as shown in
Figure 2. As a structure weakens, its sti_ness decreases, and
thus its exible changes. Changes in structural exible over a
structure's lifetime can be used to identify and localize
damage. We have chosen this family of methodsbecause they
address the aforementioned limitations inDLAC. Moreover,
they enableus to develop a multi-level system architecture
specifically optimized for this method. We will provide here a
brief background on two particular
Technology and
Exible-based methods used within our decentralizedsystem.

While exible-based methods are well-known instructural
engineering literature, the existing research generallydeals
with algorithmic issues (i.e., selecting the bestnumerical
methods for damage identification and localization) rather
than efficiently deploying these methods on adistributed
architecture for WSNs. We will focus here onthe details of
these algorithms that are most relevant toour system design;
more mathematical details can be foundin Flexible-based
methods are executed in two stages. When the system is first
Turned on, a baseline structural modal identification is
performed. The sensors simultaneously collect vibration data.
Multiple sensors' data are correlated to identify the structure's
modal parameters (naturalfrequencies and mode shapes). The
modal parameters arethen further processed to compute the
structure's exible matrix.
Online, the data collection and processing phases aboveare
repeated, and the base station produces a new exible matrix.
By subtracting the new exible matrix from the stored one, the
base station can determine if the structureis damaged (and if
so, identify the damaged region).
We will now summarize the main components of exibile based
methods, as shown in Figure 1. The structure's modal
parameters are identified using Frequency Domain
Decomposition (FDD), an existing structural engineering
techniquewhich can be decomposed into several stages.
Traditionally, FDD is executed as follows. (1) All the nodes in
a clustersimultaneously collect D vibration samples using
theironboard accelerometers. The size of D depends on
structuralproperties (like its complexity and material) as well
asthe modes we are interested in, and is typically hundreds or
thousands of samples. (2,3) Each node independently performs
an FFT and power spectrum analysis on the vibrationdata,
transforming it into magnitudes in the frequency domain.(4) D
magnitudes collected from each node are correlatedto compute
a Cross Spectral Density (CSD) matrix.(5) A Singular Value
Decomposition (SVD) is performed onthe CSD matrix at each
of D discrete frequencies. The singular value in each singular
value matrix is collected to forma vector, and the structure's P
lowest natural frequencies areidentified as the peaks in this
vector. The mode shapes correspondingto the natural
frequencies can be estimated from the first column of the
corresponding left SVD matrix.
The FDD output is then input into a exible-based
method. System uses two specific exible-based methods:
the Angles-Between-String-and-Horizon exible based method
(ASHFM) and the Axial Strain exible based method (ASFM) .
We are particularly interestedin these two methods because
they can localize damage downto a resolution of a specific
element on beam-like and trusslikestructures, respectively.
Most other exible-based methods localize damage only to less
specific regions of the structure, while it achieves similar

20

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

damage localization resolutionat a much higher computational

cost.
II.
FAULT DETECTION AND RECOVERY
Detection of faulty sensor nodes can be achieved by two

mechanisms i.e. self-detection (orpassive-detection) and
active-detection. In self-detection, sensor nodes are required to
Periodically monitor their residual energy, and identify the
potential failure. In this scheme, weconsider the battery
depletion as a main cause of node sudden death. A node is
termed as failingwhen its energy drops below the threshold
value. When a common node is failing due to energydepletion,
it sends a message to its cell manager that it is going to sleep
mode due to energy below the threshold value. This requires
no recovery steps. Self-detection is considered as alocal
computational process of sensor nodes, and requires less innetwork communication toconserve the node energy. In
addition, it also reduces the response delay of the management
System towards the potential failure of sensor nodes.
To efficiently detect the node sudden death, our fault
management system employed an activedetection mode. In
this approach, the message of updating the node residual
battery is applied totrack the existence of sensor nodes. In
active detection, cell manager asks its cell members onregular
basis to send their updates. Such as the cell manager sends
get messages to theassociated common nodes on regular
basis and in return nodes send their updates. This is calledincell update cycle. The update message consists of node ID,
energy and location information. Asshown in figure 2.1,
exchange of update messages takes place between cell
manager and its cell members. If the cell manager does not
receive an update from any node then it sends an
instantmessage to the node acquiring about its status. If cell
manager does not receive the acknowledgement in a given
time, it then declares the node faulty and passes this
information tothe remaining nodes in the cell. Cell managers
only concentrate on its cell members and onlyinform the group
manager for further assistant if the network performance of its
small region hasbeen in a critical level. A cell manager also
employs the self-detection approach and regularly monitors its
residualenergy status. All sensor nodes start with the same
residual energy. After going through varioustransmissions, the
node energy decreases. If the node energy becomes less than
or equal to 20%of battery life, the node is ranked as low
energy node and becomes liable to put to sleep. If thenode
energy is greater or equal to 50% of the battery life, it is
ranked as high and becomes thepromising candidate for the
cell manager. Thus, if a cell manager residual energy becomes
lessthan or equal to 20% of battery life, it then triggers the
alarm and notifies its cell members and the group manager of
its low energy status and appoints a new cell manager to
replace it.
Technology and
Every cell manager sends health status information to its

group manager. This is called out-cell update cycle and are
less frequent than in-cell update cycle. If a group manager
does not hearfrom a particular cell manager during out-cell
update cycle, it then sends a quick reminder to the Cell
manager and enquires about its status. If the group manager
does not hear from the same cellmanager again during second
update cycle, it then declares the cell manager faulty and
informs its cell members. This approach is used to detect the
sudden death of a cell manager. Groupmanager also monitor
its health status regularly and respond when its residual energy
dropsbelow the threshold value. It notifies its cell members
and neighboring group managers of its lowenergy status and
an indication to appoint a new group manager. Sudden death
of a groupmanager can be detected by the base station. If the
bases station does not receive any traffic froma particular
group manager, it then consults the group manager and asks
for its current status. Ifthe base station does not receive any
acknowledgement; it then considers the group managerfaulty
(sudden death) and propagates this information to its cell
managers. The base stationprimarily focuses on the existence
of the group managers from their sudden death.
Meanwhile,the group managers and cell managers take most
parts in passive and active detection in thenetwork.
A. Fault Recovery Process
After nodes failure detection (as a result of self-detection or
active detection), sleeping nodes canbe awaked to cover the
required cell density or mobile nodes can be moved to fill the
coveragehole. A cell manager also appoints a secondary cell
manager within its cell to acts as a backupcell manager. Cell
manager and secondary cell manager are known to their cell
members. If the cell manager energy drops below the
threshold value (i.e. less than or equal to 20% of batterylife), it
then sends a message to its cell members including secondary
cell manager. It also informs its group manager of its residual
energy status and about the candidate secondary cellmanager.
This is an indication for secondary cell manager to stand up as
a new cell manager andthe existing cell manager becomes
common node and goes to a low computational
mode.Common nodes will automatically start treating the
secondary cell manager as their new cellmanager and the new
cell manager upon receiving updates from its cell members;
choose a new secondary cell manager. The failure recovery
mechanisms are performed locally by each cell. In let us
assume that cell 1 cell manager is failing due to energy
depletion andnode 3 is chosen as secondary cell manager. Cell
manager will send a message to node 1, 2, 3and 4 and this will
initiate the recovery mechanism by invoking node 3 to stand
up as a new cellmanager.
In a scenario, where the residual battery energy of a particular
cell manager is not sufficientenough to support its

21

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

management role, and the secondary cell manager also does

not havesufficient energy to replace its cell manager. Thus,
common nodes exchange energy messageswithin the cell to
appoint a new cell manager with residual energy greater or
equal to 50% ofbattery life. In addition, if there is no candidate
node within the cell that has sufficient energy toreplace the
cell manager. The event cell manager sends a request to its
group manager to mergethe remaining nodes with the
neighboring cells.When a group manager detects the sudden
death of a cell manager, it then informs the cellmembers of
that faulty cell manager (including the secondary cell
manager). This is an indication
Technology and
operation. Therefore, a group manager caneasily avoid using

cells with low health status or alternatively, instruct the low
health status cellto join the neighboring cell.
B. REASONS OF FAILURE OF SENSOR NODE IN WSN:
In Wireless Sensor Networks, Sensor nodes get fail due to
their deployment in harsh environment. Sensor nodes get fail
due to hardware failure, energy utilization, and malicious
attacks.
In Wireless sensor networks, sensing unit and transceiver
directly interact with the environment which is subject to
variety ofphysical, chemical and biological factors which
further affect the reliability of sensor nodes.
In WSN, Whether the hardware condition is good, but the
communication between sensor nodes get affected by signal
strength, interferences, obstacles.
Sensor nodes have limited battery power that cannot be
replenished. When sensor node depletes their energy then that
nodebecome the fault node and cannot relay the data to the
base station and network functionality get affected.
C. Proposed Model For Fault Tolerance
Figure 2.1 : Fault Detection and Diagnostics Process

For the secondary cell manager to start acting as a new cell
manager. A group manager alsomaintains a backup node
within the group to replace it when required. If the group
managerresidual energy drops below the threshold value (i.e.
greater or equal to 50% of battery life), itmay downgrade itself
to a common node or enter into a sleep mode, and notify its
backup nodeto replace it. The information of this change is
propagated to neighboring group managers andcell managers
within the group. As a result of group manager sudden death,
the backup node willreceive a message from the base station
to start acting as the new group manager. If the backupnode
does not have enough energy to replace the group manager,
cell managers within a groupco-ordinate to appoint a new
group manager for themselves based on residual energy.
Each cell maintains its health status in terms of energy. It
can be High, Medium or Low.These health statuses are then
sent out to their associate group managers periodically during
out cell update cycle. Upon receiving these health statuses,
group manager predict and avoid futurefaults. For example; if
a cell has health status high then group manager always
recommends thatcell for any operation or routing but if the
health status is medium then group manager willoccasionally
recommend it for any operation. Health status Low means that
the cell hasinsufficient energy and should be avoided for any
We assume that sensors are randomly deployed in the

interested area which is very dense and allthe sensors have a
common transmission range. The dark circles in the figure
represent faultysensors and the gray circles are good sensors.
There might be a failure occurring in a certain areaas
illustrated in the figure 2.1. All sensors in this area go out of
service. As we are depending on majority voting among the
sensors, we assume that each sensor nodehas at least 3
neighboring nodes. Because a large amount of sensors are
deployed into theinterested area to form a wireless network,
this condition can be easily obtained. Each sensornode is able
to locate its neighbors within its transmission range via a
broadcast/ acknowledgeprotocol. Faults can occur at different
levels of the sensor network, such as system software,
hardware, physical layer, and middleware. In this mechanism,
we focus on hardware level faults by assuming all system
software as well asthe application software is always fault
tolerant. We can categorize the hardware components ofsensor
nodes into two groups. The first group of hardware level
components consists of a storagesubsystem, computation
engine and power supply infrastructure. The second groups
ofcomponents are sensors and actuators. The second group is
most prone to malfunctioning. Weonly consider the sensor
faults which occur in the second group. Sensor nodes are
stillcapable of receiving, sending, and processing when they
are faulty in the algorithm.Sensors are considered as
neighboring sensors if they are within the transmission range
of eachother. Each node regularly sends its measured value to
all its neighbors. We are interested in the history data if more

22

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

than half of the sensors neighbors have a significantly

different value fromit. We can find the current measurement is
different from previous measurement. If themeasurements
change over the time significantly, it is more likely the sensor
is faulty.
Figure 3.1 Role of various sensors in the system

III.
ARCHITECHTURE OF THE SYSTEM
The numerical methods discussed above have been

designedwith centralized networks in mind, where sensors are
used as simple data collection devices that can stream
largedata sets to a central server over a wired backbone.
Under a WSN, this approach is inappropriate because of the
nodes' limited network and energy resources. However, in
order to design an efficient decentralized architecture, we can
leverage a particularly powerful feature of these exible based
Methods. Specifically, they enable a tradeoff between energy
consumption and localization resolution: the more nodes that
are activated, the finer-grained the damage localization.We
leverage this feature to construct an energy-efficient,multilevel damage localization system which selectively
activatesadditional sensors at each level in order to more
preciselylocalize structural damage. In the common case
thatthe structure is not damaged at all, only a minimal subsetof
nodes are enabled, considerably reducing the system'senergy
and bandwidth consumption. This approach naturallymaps to a
hierarchical, cluster-based distributed network architecture. In
addition, to promote a more efficientmapping onto our
distributed system, we leverage an existingpeak picking
technique to reduce the data low amongsensors participating
in each cluster. After the text edit has been completed, the
paper is ready for the template. Duplicate the template file by
using the Save As command, and use the naming convention
prescribed by your conference for the name of your paper. In
this newly created file, highlight all of the contents and import
your prepared text file. You are now ready to style your paper;
use the scroll down window on the left of the MS Word
Formatting toolbar.
Technology and
A. Multi-Level Damage Localization

Although adding more sensors can improve a exibility-based
method's localization results, only a handful of sensors are
needed to accurately identify damage. In the first stage of the
multi-level search, this minimal number of sensors is enabled,
forming a single cluster. Damage identification and
localization is performed using this small subset of sensors. In
the common case that no damage is identified, the search ends
and all the nodes return to sleep.
In the event that damage is identified, the exibility-based
method will also output coarse-grained damage localization.
For example, ASHFM will identify two adjacent sensors surrounding each damage location on the structure. In the next
round of the multi-level search, the system activates additional
sensors in the region of interest and repeats the entire
procedure, including collecting new vibration data. This
second round subsequently localizes the damage to a smaller
region than the first round. The system may re- peat this drilldown procedure to achieve even finer grained results until the
desired resolution is reached.The key feature of this approach
is that it does not activate the entire sensor network at once.
Instead, relatively few sensors are used to identify damage;
and when damage is identified, only those sensors in the area
of interest are incrementally added to the search. As a result,
many nodes are able to remain asleep for part or all of the
multi-level search.This approach will also scale to larger
structures, since thecost of the search is no longer proportional
to the size ofthe structure. The reduced energy burden can also
be distributed across the network by activating different
subsets of the network at different times.
B. Network Hierarchy
Once the nodes participating in this multi-level search
areselected, they are each assigned one of three different
roles:cluster member, cluster head, and base station. A
node'srole determines what data it handles as well as its level
inthe network hierarchy, as shown in Figure 4. To allow
thesystem to better scale to large structures, the nodes maybe
organized into multiple independent clusters. Each cluster
operates as an independent unit, with the cluster
headcoordinating nodes within its cluster and ultimately
transmitting the cluster's (relatively small) mode shape data to
the base station for final processing.Based on these roles, the
system operates as follows. Thecluster members collect raw
vibration samples from their on-board accelerometers. They
then carry out an FFT to transform the vibration response into
frequency domain data, followed by a power spectrum
analysis.The cluster head nodes aggregate the extracted
powerspectrum data from the cluster members beneath them
inthe hierarchy. There, the CSD and SVD are carried out
toextract the structure's mode shape vector.The cluster heads

23

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

then transmit the mode shapes to asingle base station node,

which calculates the structures exibility. The exibility is then
used to identify and localizeany structural damage.
IV.
PROPOSED MECHANISM
Technology and
modal analysis at the cluster level. In the WSNperspective, CSHM is resource-consuming, where a CHneeds a lot of
computation, delay, and transmission, due to such modal
analysis. When we deploy a homogeneous WSN, such Ach
may be the bottleneck, and may fail before a period of
monitoring is over. We overcome these drawbacks. Section 5
further elaborates on these.
C. Cluster as a Subgraph
We consider each cluster as a sub graph of the WSN (where is
a set of deployed sensors and isthe set of edges) as to detect
repairing points (RPs) on thedeployed WSN, since each
cluster with the primary sensorsmay be fault-prone or weakly
connected ( ). Some sensorsmay not become parts of the
cluster. After clustering, ourobjective is to detect the RPs in
the WSN, and provide faulttolerance for the RPs and for the
data packet-loss in eachcluster. The level of fault tolerance is
the failure of up tosensors, which means to achieve a connected cluster. Thesensor fault tolerance has to be achieved
by all independentCHs and sensors (i.e., cluster members).
Algorithm for Backup Sensor Placement
Sensors are consideredas neighboringsensors if theyare

within the transmission rangeof each other. Each node
regularly sends its measured value to all its neighbors. We
are interested in the history data if more than half of the
sensors neighbors have a significantly different value from
it. We can find the current measurement is different from
previous measurement.If themeasurements changeover the
time significantly, it is more likely the sensor is faulty.
A. Backup Sensor Placement
In this section, we first briefly describe an SHM
applicationspecificclustering. Then, we propose our BS
algorithm, including several sub-algorithms.
B. Clustering
In FTSHM, we detect possible repairing (failure) points in
theWSN, and repair them by placing backup sensors
throughclusters. We improve an existing clustering approach
suggestedfor
SHM,
called
C-SHM,
which
is
specificallydesigned for SHM application. It obtains dynamic
vibration characteristics of each cluster area, and then carries
outstructural modal analysis (e.g., mode shape). It proves
thatthe clustering for WSN-based SHM should meet some
extra requirements for modal analysts. In the SHM
perspective, although C-SHM is distributedand shown to
outperform centralized approaches, it carriesout excessive
The placement of backup sensors is performed through each

cluster. BSP algorithm is relatively simple: finding locationsto
places the backup sensors, and improving unstable orweak connected clusters into strongly -connected clusters. First,
BSP algorithm detects all of the repairing (or failure) points
(RPs) step by step. The possible RPs are separablepoints,
critical middle points, and isolated points in the WSN. Then,
the algorithm places backup sensors until all RPs are found, or
all backup sensors are placed through three sub algorithms,
namely, BSP1, BSP2, and BSP3. All three algorithms call
another algorithm, Search-and-Place, for finding locations
around each RP. We will subsequently describeBSP1, BSP2,
and BSP3.In the BSP algorithm (see Algorithm 1), there is a
set B of R backup sensors, is a degree of connectivity, and all
clusters ofthe network are inputs. The output is the placement
of R backup sensors, and a strongly connected network.

24

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

Technology and
The BSP algorithm has three steps. InStep1, BSP algorithm

first calls the three sub-algorithms (i.e., BSP1, BSP2, and
BSP3) that are used to detect RPs. Each of them calls an
algorithm for placing backup sensors at the RPs. When
running any of the three algorithms, if there is no RP in any
cluster, the algorithm stops searching and goes to the next
algorithm. When the three algorithms are executed, Step
2continues.When Step 2is over, BSP algorithm goes to the
next cluster. When placement of all of the given backup
sensors is over, the BSP algorithm terminates. Let and
be
the
number
of
backup
sensors
to
be
placedduringtheBSP1,BSP2,andBSP3algorithms,runtimes,
respectively.
We consider Step 2asan option. Ifthere are stillsome
backupsensors available tobeplaced, i.e.,
> ,we can
placethemorsavethem.We
thinkthattheWSNcanbe
sufcientlyconnectedafterplacementofthebackupsensors.
However, there may remain some backupsensors to be
placed, since the total numberofRPscan belessormore than
.If
islessthanthenumberofRPs(afterplacing the backup
sensors),wediscardndingRPs.Step2checks
whethertherearestillbackupsensors available ornot.Ifan SHM
user does not wish to place more backup sensors, Step2can
2inour
beskipped.However,we did not skip Step
evaluation.Wethink that the same physical sensor
dependingonthe
canfeedintotwoormore
sensors,
availabilityofbackupsensors. Step2checks all the sensor
locations througheachcluster onebyone,and counts how
manybackupsensorsareplacedateachlocation.
If a location is still with only one sensor (i.e., no backup
sensor is placed yet), a backup sensor is placed at the
location. If two sensors are already placed at a location,
including one backup sensor, we skip the location.
allthe
backupsensors
Theplacementcontinuesuntil
areplaced, i.e.,
-ConnectivityMaintenance: InStep3, BSP
algorithm calls a connectivity maintenance algorithm, Connectivity-Recovery, which starts with a cluster (all the
clusters are static, but the number of sensors may change due
to sensor faults).The purpose of this algorithm is to improve
connectivity of the WSN in an event of sensor failure,
orconnectivitydegradation.Ifalltheconnectionsbelongingtoaf
ailed(orremoved) sensor fail, we still require the
improvement of the current connectivity to -connectivity.
The value of
can be fixed, such as For the case the
minimum weight-connected cluster is known to be NPhard. Related connectivity algorithms and theorems can be
found in the literature.
Algorithm 2. Damage indicator algorithm
damage, a CH
If there is an indication of a possible
transmits the indication to the BS; otherwise, it just
maintains connectivity with the BS and the sensors. The BS
receives indications from all of the CHs an disable to know
the health of the whole structure. After analyzing, if the BS
determines that there is possibly damage, the BS can query
the corresponding cluster or the sensors for detailed mode
shapes, even for all sets of frequencies. In this way, if there is
no damage indication(because we think that damage is a kind
of event that rarely occurs in a structure), the amount of data
is reduced before transmission
CONCLUSION
In this paper, our intention was to demonstrate a new way
of incorporating the requirements of both WSN and SHM,
and to make use of traditional engineering methods in the
WSN. We found that it is worthwhile to place a small
number of backup sensors around the repair points in the
WSN to have a better performance. We believe that such an
idea (of the backup sensor placement) can also be used in
generic WSN applications. Besides, we proposed an SHM
algorithm exploiting sensor-decentralized computing in
there source-constrained WSN. Through extensive

25

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

simulations and area implementation using integrated

Imote2sensors, we validated the effectiveness of our
approach. The validation shows that structural health
monitoring using WSN scan be meaningless, if the
requirements of WSNs (e.g., fault tolerance, energyefficiency) are not seriously considered.
Thiswork leaves atleast two open issues in the multidomain research area. One issue is to develop algorithms
for SHM application- specific sensor fault detection and
recovery. Another issue is to develop a SHM specific
scheduling technique for the backup sensors that will wake
up one or more backup sensors in the areas of interest (e.g.,
damaged area)in the case of a sensor fault/failure. This
and connectivity
may help to meet both coverage
requirements in a WSN-based SHMsystem.
REFERENCES
[1] X. Mao, X. Miao, Y. He, T. Zhu, J. Wang, W. Dong, X.
Li, and Y. Liu, CitySee: Urban CO2 monitoring with
sensors, in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Commun.
(INFOCOM), 2012, pp. 10261034.
[2] G. Wang, M. Z. A. Bhuiyan, and Z. Li, Two-level
cooperative and energy-efcient tracking
algorithm in
wireless sensor networks, Concurrency Comput. Practice
Experience, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 518537,2010.
[3] M. Z. A. Bhuiyan, G. Wang, J. Cao, and J. Wu,
Energy and bandwidth-efcient wireless sensor networks
for monitoring high-frequency events, in Proc. 10th Annu.
IEEE Commun. Soc. Conf.Sensor Mesh Ad Hoc Commun.
Networks (SECON), 2013
[4] M. Z. A. Bhuiyan, G. Wang, J. Cao, and J. Wu, Local
monitoring and maintenance for operational wireless sensor
networks, in Proc.12th IEEE Int. Conf. Trust Security
Privacy Comput. Commun. (ISPA),
2013.
[5] S. Kim, S. Pakzad, D. Culler, J. Demmel, G. Fenves, S.
Glaser, and M.Turon,
Health monitoring of civil
infrastructures using wireless sensor networks, in Proc. 6th
Int. Symp. Inform. Process. Sensor Netw.(IPSN), 2007, pp.
254263.
[6] G.Hackmann, F. Sun, N. Castaneda, C. Lu, and S. Dyke,
A holistic approach to decentralized structural damage
localization using wireless sensor networks, Comput.
Commun., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 2941, 2012.
[7] K. Chebrolu, B. Raman, N. Mishra, P. K. Valiveti, and
R. Kumar, BriMon: A sensor network system for railway
bridge monitoring, in Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Mobile Syst. Appl.
Services (MobiSys), 2008, pp. 214.
[8] K. Xu, H. Hassanein, G. Takahara, and Q.Wang, Relay
node deployment strategies in heterogeneous wireless
Technology and
sensornetworks, IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput., vol. 9, no. 2,

pp. 145159, Feb. 2010
[9] N. M. Danna and E. G. Mekonnen, Data processing
algorithms in wireless sensor networks for structural health
monitoring, Masters thesis, KTH, School Archit. Built
Environ., Sweden, 2012.
[10] Z. Yun, X. Bai, D. Xuan, T. H. Lai, and W. Jia, Optimal
deployment patterns for full coverage and k-connectivity
(k 6) wireless sensor networks, IEEE/ACM Trans.
Netw., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 934
947, 2010.
[11]J. Lynch, A. Sundararajan, K. Law, A. Kiremidjian, T.
Kenny, and E. Carryer, Embedment of structural monitoring
algorithms in a wireless sensing unit, Structural Engineering
and Mechanics, vol. 15, no. 3,
pp. 285297, 2003.
[12]T.Nagayama and B. Spencer Jr, Structural health
monitoring using smart sensors, Newmark Structural
Engineering Laboratory Report Series 001, 2008.
[13]K.Jeongyeup, K. Chintalapudi, and J. e. a. Paek,
Embedded Sensing of Structures: A Reality Check, in The
11th IEEE International Conference on Embedded and RealTime Computing Systems and Applications (RTCSA2005),
Hong Kong, 2005.
[14]S. Kim and S. Pakzad, Health monitoring of civil
infrastructures using wireless sensor networks, in Proc. of the
6th international conference on Information processing in
sensor networks. ACM, 2007, p. 263.
[15]J.Juang and R. Pappa, Eigensystem realization algorithm
for modal parameter identication and model reduction.
Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 8, no. 5, pp.
620627, 1985.
[16]D.Ewins, Modal testing: theory and practice. Research
Studies, 1984.
[17]A. Zimmerman and M. e. a. Shiraishi, Automated modal
parameter estimation by parallel processing within wireless
monitoring systems, Journal of Infrastructure Systems, vol.
14, p. 102, 2008.
[18]W. B. Heinzelman, A. P. Chandrakasan, and H.
Balakrishnan, An application-specic protocol architecture
for wireless microsensor networks, IEEE Transactions on
Wireless Communications, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 660670,
October 2002.
[19]O.Younis and S. Fahmy, An experimental study of
routing and data aggregation in sensor networks, in Proc. of
the IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and
Sensor Systems, 2005, pp. 5765.
[20]G. James III, T. Carne, and J. Lauffer, The natural
excitation technique (NExT) for modal parameter extraction
from operating wind turbines,NASA STI/Recon Technical
Report N, vol. 93, p. 28603, 1993.

26

Location Optimization of Wireless Sensor Networks in Specific To Structural Health Monitoring Systems

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Location Optimization of Wireless Sensor Networks in Specific To Structural Health Monitoring Systems

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ISSN (ONLINE): 2454-9762

ISSN (PRINT): 2454-9762

Available online at www.ijarmate.com