Optimal Sensor Placement in Buildings: Earthquake Excitation

This study presents a methodology for determining the optimal placement of seismic sensors along the height of buildings to minimize the uncertainty in reconstructing structural responses at non-instrumented floors. Due to the extensive benefits of instrumentation-from model validation to damage detection and structural health monitoring-the number of instrumented structures is steadily increasing. However, to keep installation and maintenance costs within a reasonable range, structures are often instrumented sparsely. The response at non-instrumented locations is typically estimated using deterministic or probabilistic model-based, data-driven, or hybrid methods. Specifically, the authors recently proposed a method that combines a deterministic beam model with Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) to estimate responses at non-instrumented floors of an instrumented building. The present paper proposes a methodology to determine optimal sensor locations that minimize the uncertainty associated with this response estimation. This work is a sequel to a previous study that was limited to stationary excitation and extends the method to seismic excitations. The methodology is first verified through a numerical example and then applied to two real instrumented buildings. The results demonstrate that an average 40% reduction in uncertainty is achievable when sensors are positioned according to the proposed optimization approach, in comparison with a random distribution of sensors. Between the two real-life cases studied in this paper, the level of reduction in the response uncertainty is around 10% for the 52-story building because the existing sensors are almost uniformly distributed, while it is around 80% for the 73-story building because the existing sensors are distributed to measure the localized behavior of the building.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sensors
Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/s26082383
Primary Topic
Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Optimal Sensor Placement in Buildings: Earthquake Excitation

Daniel Swensen, Hamid Haddadi, Farid Ghahari
Sensors
Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
article

Optimal Sensor Placement in Buildings: Earthquake Excitation

Daniel Swensen, Hamid Haddadi, Farid Ghahari
article en

Abstract

This study presents a methodology for determining the optimal placement of seismic sensors along the height of buildings to minimize the uncertainty in reconstructing structural responses at non-instrumented floors. Due to the extensive benefits of instrumentation-from model validation to damage detection and structural health monitoring-the number of instrumented structures is steadily increasing. However, to keep installation and maintenance costs within a reasonable range, structures are often instrumented sparsely. The response at non-instrumented locations is typically estimated using deterministic or probabilistic model-based, data-driven, or hybrid methods. Specifically, the authors recently proposed a method that combines a deterministic beam model with Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) to estimate responses at non-instrumented floors of an instrumented building. The present paper proposes a methodology to determine optimal sensor locations that minimize the uncertainty associated with this response estimation. This work is a sequel to a previous study that was limited to stationary excitation and extends the method to seismic excitations. The methodology is first verified through a numerical example and then applied to two real instrumented buildings. The results demonstrate that an average 40% reduction in uncertainty is achievable when sensors are positioned according to the proposed optimization approach, in comparison with a random distribution of sensors. Between the two real-life cases studied in this paper, the level of reduction in the response uncertainty is around 10% for the 52-story building because the existing sensors are almost uniformly distributed, while it is around 80% for the 73-story building because the existing sensors are distributed to measure the localized behavior of the building.

SensorsVol. 26(8)
United States Geological Survey (US), California Geological Survey, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences (US)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.