IoT framework application to SHM systems

Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI) Interested in publishing with us? Contact [email protected] Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected. For more information visit www.intechopen.com Open access books available Countries delivered to Contributors from top 500 universities International authors and editors Our authors are among the most cited scientists Downloads We are IntechOpen,the world’s leading publisher ofOpen Access booksBuilt by scientists, for scientists 14% 193,000 210M TOP 1% 154 7,300 1 Chapter IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems EduardoHidalgo-Fort, PedroBlanco-Carmona, AlvaroSerrano-Chacon, Emilio JoséMascort-Albea, FernandoMuñoz-Chavero, RamónGonzález-Carvajal, Antonio JesúsTorralba-Silgado and AntonioJaramillo-Morilla Abstract This chapter presents and details a complete IoT solution for secure, synchronous, low-power, wireless and unattended structural health monitoring (SHM), whose architecture can be parameterised to any type of structure to be monitored, thanks to its modular design based on an embedded real-time operating system at the node level and a microservices architecture at the application level. This solution is validated by means of its deployment, together with two commercial reference systems, in two experimental use cases in two different structures: on the one hand, a bridge located at the Engineering School of the University of Seville (Spain) and, on the other hand, the Homage Tower of the Utrera’s Castle (Spain). The results obtained place this work as a novel solution in the current state of the art. Keywords: Internet of Things (IoT), structural health monitoring (SHM), wireless sensor network (WSN), nondestructive test (NDT), low-cost SHM, IoT applications 1. Introduction Over the last few decades, the relationship between humans and the environment surrounding us, as well as with the different frameworks, has changed considerably due to the emergence of new technologies that have made it possible increasing the quantity and heterogeneity of the information acquired from the environment, as well as from the manufacturing processes. However, this has resulted in a variety of non-standardised, and therefore non-compatible technologies and architectures that do not allow information exchange between them and limit the impact of these advances on the global state of the art. It is precisely this heterogeneous framework of needs and available technologies that gives rise to the emergence of the IoT (Internet of Things) paradigm. According to IBM [1], IoT is the concept of interconnecting any device, thing, or person (things) to the Internet and to other devices and people to share data on their behaviour and that of the surrounding environment. Oracle [2] specifies how these ‛ thingsʼ can range from everyday objects to sophisticated industrial tools. This global Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 2 integration is produced thanks to the definition of a standardised layered architecture [3, 4] shown in Figure 1 and has a direct impact on the technology and its use, offering new capabilities and advantages over the previous framework, such as very low-cost and low-power devices with Internet connectivity and their integration in cloud processing platforms where they can host from simple applications to complex analysis processes based on machine learning techniques. The ability to integrate connected networked devices into a single system is one of the main features that make IoT a very attractive technology in the era of digital transformation. The evolution of wireless communication technologies, the standardisation of IoT architecture and the globalisation of manufacturing processes invite the implementation of the new paradigm in these production lines, which has given rise to the concept of Industry 4. 0, the fourth industrial revolution characterised by the integration of advanced technologies to create smart factories, cyber-physical systems and IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things) [5]. The implementation of IoT in industry is becoming more and more common due to its numerous advantages, generating several industry-beneficial applications: (1) Predictive analytics and preventive maintenance improving by enabling data collection and subsequent analysis and helping predict machine failures and perform preventive maintenance before they occur, which in turn reduces costs and downtime [6], (2) Improving product quality by monitoring and controlling critical factors during the production process allowed for greater control over processes and reduction of defects [7], (3) Edge computing [8], technology responsible for processing data in real time at the point, where it is generated rather than sending it to a central location for processing, reducing processing time and load on central networks and servers and (4) Digital twin generation [9], enabling simulation and testing of different scenarios virtually, which reduces the costs and risks associated with testing and validation processes. All these technological advances are reflected in the 5.5 billion devices connected in 2022 to operated networks (2G/3G, NB-IoT/CatM, 4/5G) according to the manufacturer Ericsson [10] on the 43 billion connected devices estimated for 2023 Figure 1. Standardised IoT four-layer architecture. 3 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 by Forbes magazine [11]. On the other hand, this impact translates directly to the market, as predicted by the market analysis organisation Strait Research in its report [12], where it estimates a market evolution from USD 813 billion in 2021 to more than USD 2483 billion in 2030. Thanks to the IoT benefits, it is applicable in different sectors such as smart agriculture [13–15], where more economically efficient ecosystems are generated by automating tasks such as cultivation and its monitoring allowing early detection of pests and diseases, in Healthcare [16–18], where remote and real-time monitoring, especially after the global pandemic of COVID-19, enables early and accurate detection of pathologies, while the application layer allows direct integration of patients with all links in the healthcare chain, resulting in new care models that improve the health and experience of patients, as well as the performance of healthcare professionals and smart homes [19, 20], where the integration of domestic elements in a secure and real-time network allows the optimization of different aspects such as energy management (even generating energy communities), the improvement of the feeling of comfort and the adaptation of the environment to the emotional state of the inhabitants. This framework has given rise to the smart city concept [21], which integrates structural monitoring of buildings, traffic control, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications, waste management, noise monitoring or air quality, among others; and the automotive sector [22, 23], where the emergence of 5G communications allows real-time monitoring of vehicles and cloud computing the generation of digital twins [24] application of machine learning algorithms for vehicle and fleet management tasks from behavioural analysis, accident detection [25] and predictive maintenance. These applications provide an overview of how SHM calculation could be automated with current technology. Today, using the range of components that comprise the IoT architecture, data can be obtained in an automated way, and, in real time, relevant indicators for determining structural health. 2. Structural health monitoring Once a given structure has been built, whether it is a building or civil infrastructure, it is necessary to identify any damage that may compromise structural safety at an early stage. In this context, the structural health monitoring (SHM) plays a key role. According to the International Society for Structural Health Monitoring of Intelligent Infrastructures, it can be defined as: ‘a type of system that provides ondemand information about any significant change or damage to the structure’ [26]. This discipline has experienced great growth in recent decades. Equipping, a structure with a structural monitoring system, has many advantages. A direct consequence of this is better control of structural safety, detecting in advance situations that could lead to collapse. Moreover, a proper structural diagnosis is vital to design an adequate repair or reinforcement intervention and, consequently, extend the useful life of the construction. Basically, a structural health monitoring system consists of several elements, which can be grouped into six blocks [27]: (i) a sensory system (SS), (ii) a data acquisition and transmission system (DATS), (iii) a data processing and control system (DPCS), (iv) a data management system (DMS), (v) a structural health evaluation system (SHES) and (vi) an inspection and maintenance system (IMS). The first two blocks are located in the structure itself, while the next three blocks are normally Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 4 located outside the structure. The last block supports all the others. The relationship between the listed blocks is graphically depicted in Figure 2. Depending on the number of variables under study, the SHM system can be made up of a wide variety of sensors. In some cases, the focus is on taking data relating to environmental conditions, such as humidity or temperature. In other cases, the interest extends to data related to the response of the structure. This response can be expressed in terms of displacements, velocities or accelerations. These three variables have a very small magnitude when the structure is subjected to environmental excitations. Among them, acceleration is the most commonly used parameter in the dynamic characterisation of the construction by means of operational modal analysis. The sensor used to measure the rate of change of velocity with respect to time is known as an accelerometer. Currently, these sensors can be classified according to the technology used, with the following types being distinguished: piezoelectric, piezoresistive, capacitive, balanced force, optical and thermal, among others. In each category, there are multiple variants depending on the number of axes, the range, the bandwidth or the price. Traditionally, the collection of acceleration readings in the structure is performed with commercial accelerographs [28, 29]. This equipment is characterised by high accuracy, which usually involves high costs. Accelerograph prototypes developed around micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) accelerometers are becoming increasingly common [30, 31]. In this way, it is possible to obtain devices that are very economical and at the same time very low in energy consumption [32]. The equipment constructed in this way is also lightweight and very small in size, which makes it easy to transport and place in structures. Acceleration data collected with accelerometers are used for the estimation of the dynamic properties of structures. For this purpose, a large number of well-known operational modal analysis methods are available. These methods are usually classified according to the domain in which the identification of modal parameters takes place, with two groups being distinguished: (i) time domain methods, which operate directly on the signals recorded in tests or on correlation functions, such as natural excitation Figure 2. Composition of a SHM system. Source: Author, based on Ref. [27]. 5 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 technique [33], covariance-driven stochastic subspace identification [34] and datadriven stochastic subspace identification [35] and (ii) frequency domain methods, which require the calculation of spectral density functions. This second group includes, among others, the following methods: maximum likelihood [36], frequency domain decomposition [37] and enhanced frequency domain decomposition [38]. The complete dynamic characterisation of a structure requires the determination of the three basic dynamic properties of the structure, namely natural frequencies, modal displacements and modal damping factors. When the structure deteriorates, either due to the passage of time or a sudden event such as an earthquake or a vehicle collision, a variation of these dynamic properties occurs. Therefore, in order to assess the deterioration of the building, it is necessary to compare two states: (i) initial or reference, which generally corresponds to a situation in which the structure has not been damaged and (ii) final, in which it is expected to have suffered some type of damage. Perhaps the simplest way to detect damage in a construction is by the reduction of the natural frequencies of the structure. This is evidenced by the large number of scientific papers published in the last quarter of a century related to structural diagnostics. Under the assumption that the mass remains constant, the progression of deterioration will lead to a decrease in the stiffness of the structure. Consequently, there will be a reduction of the natural frequencies. However, the observation of significant changes in the natural frequencies requires a considerable deterioration of the structure. In the other direction, an increase in this dynamic property is useful to check the effectiveness of certain repair or reinforcement actions on the structure under study. Typically, structural damage is classified into four levels according to the degree of information that is available about it. In this context, it is common practice in the scientific community to use the damage levels proposed by Rytter [39], which are summarised in Table 1. In terms of the level of damage, methods based on changes in natural frequencies are only useful to indicate the presence of damage to the structure (Level I). When a higher degree of information on the deterioration of the building is required, techniques using variations in modal displacements are often used. In this way, it is possible to locate the most likely area in which the damage is located (Level II). On the other hand, civil engineering has not been transparent to the technological evolution prior to the emergence of the IoT and, as a consequence, numerous solutions have appeared for different fields of application [40–42], which have not been able to mature enough to become widely adopted solutions by the community, mainly due to the changing and constant emergence of new technologies and, therefore, have Level Name Description Level 1 Detection Indication of the presence of damage to the structure Level 2 Localisation Level I+Geometric location of damage Level 3 Assessment Level II+Estimation of the extent of damage Level 4 Prediction Level III+Structural safety prediction Source: [39]. Table 1. Levels of damage on structures. Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 6 not generated systems for the extraction of advanced information from structures (Level III or Level IV). However, the emergence of the IoT paradigm and its standardised architecture as an integrative ecosystem eliminates dependencies between layers, and thus allows for expert contributions from each knowledge area to its corresponding layer. In other words, this allows the development and evolution of each of the functional blocks of a SHM system (data processing, hardware design, firmware design, high-level applications, etc.) independently in a framework that ensures the integration of all of them and the bridging of desired levels III and IV. 3. Proposed solution Once the application framework has been analysed, the design of the proposed SHM-IoT solution is carried out. To do this, initially, an analysis of the main requirements to be met by the resulting design will be carried out and, subsequently, the most important implementation aspects that give rise to the solution will be detailed. 3.1 Requirements Based on the usual IoT device architecture model, the proposed solution is composed of four functional layers (Figure 1) with the following scope: • Perception layer: These are the devices or nodes in charge of carrying out the monitoring of the structure under analysis by acquiring the magnitudes of interest. • Transport layer: This is the infrastructure responsible for guaranteeing a communication channel between the monitoring nodes and the processing and application layers. • Processing layer: It is in charge of housing the data center with the capacity to execute data processing algorithms (traditional or machine learning) and offer its services to the application layer. • Application layer: Together with the processing layer, it makes up the application server (physical or virtual) and hosts the applications necessary to carry out both the exploitation of the information generated by the processing layer and the management of the monitored infrastructures. In this way, the integration of the solution in the IoT paradigm is guaranteed. The specific requirements of each of the proposed layers are detailed below. 3.1.1 Perception layer The measurement devices are one of the most important elements of the proposed solution as they are responsible for monitoring the behaviour of the structure under test and the surrounding environment. Ultimately, therefore, they are the interface between the rest of the system and the infrastructure. In terms of technological requirements and challenges, the following are the most important. 7 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 3.1.1.1 Versatility and scalability From a functional point of view, for frequency analysis, it is necessary for the nodes to have the capacity to monitor structural accelerations. Nevertheless, each structure has different monitoring needs depending on its architecture, typology or impact on society. For this reason, the proposed solution must be versatile in terms of the type of magnitudes to be monitored, which would allow it to be adapted to any civil infrastructure. In the same way, each structure will have different needs in terms of the number of monitoring points, so the scalability of the solution becomes one of the enabling factors to ensure its success. 3.1.1.2 Wireless connection Even though the IoT framework allows for the integration of both wireless and wired devices, the proposed application involves the monitoring of civil, strategic and historical heritage infrastructure, where the minimisation of visual pollution is an important factor. This implies devices as small as possible. On the other hand, from an economic point of view, the elimination of the high cost of cabling and its installation and maintenance, added to the low cost of wireless communications, makes wireless communications a must. 3.1.1.3 Time synchronisation Frequency analysis of structures implies the need for time-synchronised devices so that the structural behaviour of the monitored building can be reconstructed for subsequent analysis using operational modal analysis (OMA) techniques. 3.1.1.4 Low energy consumption One of the key aspects for the success of the solution is to meet very strict low-power requirements, so as to guarantee the operability of the deployed solution without the need for an external power supply (many infrastructures do not have an electrical installation) or to carry out maintenance work on it. These tasks would include the replacement of batteries, which has a direct impact on the cost of the solution and avoids the management of access to the infrastructures, which presents an added difficulty in the case of structures belonging to historical heritage. 3.1.1.5 Remote updating Since this is a novel solution and a line of research in constant evolution, added to the fact that the structural particularity of each construction implies a parameterisation of the monitoring systems (full scale, sampling frequency, preprocessing, etc.), the need to carry out firmware updates of the devices deployed is guaranteed. Therefore, it is necessary for the measurement nodes to have FOTA (Firmware over the air) functionality that allows them to be updated without the need for physical action (usually located in areas that are difficult to access), avoiding interaction with strategic structures or historical heritage, as well as the management of complex bureaucratic permits and helping to reduce maintenance costs. Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 8 3.1.2 Transport layer Another of the key aspects for the implementation of the proposed solution is the communications infrastructure used to send information between its different functional elements. On this point, it is important to note that the solution presented must be suitable for monitoring a structure or a set of structures that may be located in one geographical point or distributed throughout the entire regional, autonomous or national geography (depending on the organisation that operates them), which, due to costs, rules out the option of using local networks maintained by the owners of the structures and highlights the need for a solution that offers communications to all of them globally, which makes it necessary to think of operated networks. On the other hand, given that it may be a strategic infrastructure, it is necessary that the communications network offers sufficient security mechanisms to guarantee the integration and privacy of the information transmitted, as well as long-term operability. 3.1.3 Processing layer The third main element is the application server, which will be in charge of providing secure services to both the processing layer and the application layer. While integration in an IoT framework involves hosting services on a server (physical or virtual) in the cloud, it is necessary to think of a design based on microservices that allow scaling the functionalities of the deployed solution without the need to redesign the previous deployment and, therefore, will facilitate the integration of new value-added applications. This feature will also allow the migration of deployed services with minimum effort from one service provider to another if necessary. On the other hand, the large amount and heterogeneous nature of data collected from infrastructures require an architecture and engine capable of integrating, moving and processing such data. For this reason, a non-relational database architecture and big data should be chosen. The processing layer will oversee housing the processing algorithms in charge of extracting the structural characteristics of the monitored buildings from the data collected by the perception layer. Finally, these results will be offered to the application layer for subsequent exploitation. 3.1.4 Application layer Finally, like the processing layer and the application layer should be composed of those microservices necessary to ensure the management of the monitored assets and provide the end user with visualisation of results and secure access based on roles and permission schemes. 3.2 IoT solution implementation details 3.2.1 Perception layer From a hardware design point of view, the monitoring nodes have an architecture of two printed circuit boards (PCB) with different functionality. On the one hand, 15 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 than 1%. In the identification of the fundamental frequency and the frequency associated with the third mode of vibration, the relative error increases to about 5%. This difference is even greater in the last detected vibration mode. It should be noted that the equipment presented has a significantly lower cost than commercial equipment but, even so, it allows the identification of the first three modes of vibration of the structure with a good degree of approximation. Although the deviation is higher in other modes of vibration, this is not very relevant as the higher modes are less significant from a structural point of view. 4.3 The homage tower of the Utrera’s castle This building belongs to the Utrera’s Castle and is located in the town of the same name in Seville. The castle is considered to be built between the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. This justifies the use of older building materials such as rammed earth, brick and stone. The tower under study has a rectangular cross section, with a smaller side of 11.50m and a larger side of 12.12m. The distance between the base and the parapet of the roof is 18.55m. The walls are 1.90m thick, although the side with the stairs is thicker. The tower is divided in height into two chambers, which are limited at the top by two vaults. In Figure 7, it can be seen a photograph of the current state of the Homage Tower. 4.3.1 Dynamic characterisation The recording of accelerations in the tower is carried out at eight points, which are shown in Figure 8. In this last figure, the orientation of the accelerographs can be seen, with the z-axis in the direction of the gravitational acceleration, but in an upward direction. Point A was taken as the reference point for all tests so that seven ambient vibration tests were carried out at the Homage Tower. Figure 7. Homage tower of the Utrera’s castle. Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 16 The first experimental campaign was done with two GMS Plus6-73 devices, manufactured by GeoSIG. This device contains, among other components, a triaxial accelerometer, a 24-bit analogue-to-digital converter, a GPS and a battery. The second experimental campaign was carried out with the low-cost equipment. In both cases, a measurement range of ±2g was taken. However, there are differences with regard to the sampling frequency. In the GMS Plus6-73 station, a value of 200Hz was used, while in the developed node, a value of 125Hz was adopted. Each test has a duration of 10minutes. Figure 9 shows photographs taken during the execution of the tests with the two devices. The acceleration series recorded during the tests are transferred to the ARTeMIS Modal Pro. Previously, it is necessary to generate the geometry of the structure in a simplified form. This is composed of the eight points, where readings have been taken. In addition, the base of the tower is represented by four points. These have the same x and y coordinates as the points of the first floor but are located at zero elevation. The model generated in this way can be seen in Figure 10. Figure 9. Ambient vibration test in the homage tower: (a) GMS Plus6-73 and (b) node. Figure 8. Measurement points on the tower. 17 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 The estimation of the natural frequencies of the Homage Tower is also carried out with the EFDD and SSI-UPC-Merged methods. The results obtained with the EFDD method in the two experimental campaigns are summarised in Table 3. In the range from 0Hz to 10Hz, two modes of vibration were identified. As it can be seen in this table, the maximum relative error between the natural frequencies obtained with both experimental campaigns is 0.08%. The identification of natural frequencies with the reported node is less than 0.1% compared to the commercial equipment. This highlights the usefulness of low-cost equipment as a diagnostic tool in heritage buildings. Figure 10. Tower geometry in ARTeMIS modal pro. Mode Campaign N° 1—GMS Plus6-73 (Hz) Campaign N° 2—This work (Hz) Deviation (%) Mode 1 3.359 3.357 0.06 Mode 2 7.208 7.202 0.08 Table 3. Dynamic characterisation of the tower. Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 18 5. Conclusions This chapter introduces the IoT paradigm and its standardisation as a strategic framework for the development of large-scale deployable structural health monitoring systems. Following the presentation of the emergence and evolution of the IoT, as well as the opportunity of its application to the field of structural monitoring, this work has made it possible to reflect the importance of structural monitoring in the field of civil engineering and architecture. This relevance is even more important in the field of heritage and historical buildings, where construction techniques and technical solutions are not usually standardised. Based on these premises, the requirements that would enable such a mass deployment of SHM solutions have been presented, which have resulted in a secure, modular and scalable architecture that allows its adaptability to different types of potentially monitorable structures, such as bridges and towers. Subsequently, the proposed architecture has been validated through its development and subsequent real field tests (TRL7 level) such as the Expo92 bridge located at the Engineering School of the University of Seville (Spain) and the Homage Tower of the Utrera’s Castle (Spain). Parallel monitoring with two traditional commercial reference systems has made it possible to validate the results obtained by the developed solution. With these data sets, the natural frequencies of the two structures were estimated. The error in the estimation of the fundamental frequency is around 5% in the first case study and below 0.1% in the second case study. With regard to the natural frequencies associated with the second and third modes of vibration, deviations within the range of 5% are observed. These deviations are more pronounced for the natural frequencies associated with the higher modes. With these results, it can be concluded that the node presented in this paper can be used to carry out a dynamic characterisation of structures and, at least, to detect damage on them. From the point of view of signal processing, the architecture presented proposes a deployment of independent microservices that allow the application of different processing techniques depending on the monitored structure, which is presented as an opportunity, taking advantage of the trend of recent years, to integrate artificial intelligence and deep learning algorithms, such as [51] that allow Levels III and IV of SHM to be achieved. On the other hand, minimising energy consumption is always a technological challenge in any wireless monitoring solution such as the one presented, so minimising this energy consumption, mainly through Edge Computing techniques that minimise the amount of data to be transmitted wirelessly, is one of the most relevant current and future lines of research in this field of application. The presented solution, which has been developed according to the stack of layers proposed by the IoT framework, allows centralised efforts to be applied in the different layers without altering the relationship between them, which guarantees the future integration of the different SHM solutions that may appear in the state of the art, both for signal processing in the application layer and in the perception layer, as well as for the migration to other types of wireless communication that may appear. Therefore, it can be concluded that this work presents and validates an IoT-SHM solution for low-cost, secure, scalable, low-power, wireless and large-scale deployable structural monitoring, which positions it as a novel reference in the current state of the art. 19 IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 Acknowledgements This work was fully supported by proyecto PID2019-107258RB-C31 financiado por MCIN/ AEI /10.13039/501100011033. The authors of this work also thank the Ayuntamiento de Utrera for their collaboration in the research. Appendices and nomenclature DAQ data acquisition DATS data acquisition and transmission system DMS data management system DPCS data processing and control system EFDD enhanced frequency domain decomposition FOTA firmware over the air IMS inspection and maintenance system IIC inter-integrated circuit IoT Internet of Things LoRaWAN long range wide area network LTE long-term evolution MEMS micro-electro-mechanical systems MQTT message queuing telemetry transport NB-IoT narrow band internet of things OMA operational modal analysis PCB printed circuit board RTOS real-time operating system QoS quality of service SHES structural health evaluation system SHM structural health monitoring SPI serial peripheral interface SS sensory system SSL secure sockets layer SSI-UPC stochastic subspace identification-unweighted principal component TCP transmission control protocol TLS transport layer security TRL technology readiness level UART universal asynchronous receiver-transmitter Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 20 Author details EduardoHidalgo-Fort1*, PedroBlanco-Carmona1, AlvaroSerrano-Chacon2, Emilio JoséMascort-Albea2, FernandoMuñoz-Chavero1, RamónGonzález-Carvajal1, Antonio JesúsTorralba-Silgado1 and AntonioJaramillo-Morilla2 1 Electronic Engineering Group, University of Seville, Seville, Spain 2 Department of Building Structures and Geotechnical Engineering, University of Seville, Seville, Spain *Address all correspondence to: [email protected] © 2024 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 21 References [1] Clark J. What Is the Internet of Things, and How Does it Work? IBM Blog. 2023. Available from: https://www.ibm.com/ blog/what-is-the-iot [2] What Is the Internet of Things (IoT)? (n.d.) Available from: https:// www.oracle.com/internet-of-things/ what-is-iot/ [3] Yaqoob I, Ahmed E, Hashem IaT, Ahmed AIA, Gani A, Imran M, etal. Internet of things architecture: Recent advances, taxonomy, requirements, and open challenges. IEEE Wireless Communications. 2017;24(3):10-16. DOI:10.1109/mwc.2017.1600421 [4] Abosata N, Al-Rubaye S, Inalhan G, Emmanouilidis C. Internet of things for system integrity: A comprehensive survey on security, attacks and countermeasures for industrial applications. Sensors. 2021;21(11):3654. DOI:10.3390/s21113654 [5] Chen B, Wan J, Shu L, Li P, Mukherjee M, Yin B. Smart factory of industry 4.0: Key technologies, application case, and challenges. IEEE Access. 2018;6:6505-6519. DOI:10.1109/ access.2017.2783682 [6] Him LC, Poh YW, Pheng LS. IoT-based Predictive Maintenance for Smart Manufacturing Systems; 2019. DOI:10.1109/ apsipaasc47483.2019.9023106 [7] Hu X, Zhana X. A Novel Method for Product Quality Control Based on Production IoT Data; 2022. DOI:10.1109/ iccbd56965.2022.10080209 [8] Kong X, Wu Y, Wang H, Xia F. Edge computing for internet of everything: A survey. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2022;9(23):23472-23485. DOI:10.1109/ jiot.2022.3200431 [9] Qi Q , Tao F. Digital twin and big data towards smart manufacturing and industry 4.0: 360 degree comparison. IEEE Access. 2018;6:3585-3593. DOI:10.1109/access.2018.2793265 [10] IoT Connections Outlook. IoT connections outlook. In: Broadband IoT (4G/5G) Connections to Dominate by End of 2028. 2022. 2023. Available from: https://www.ericsson.com/en/ reports-and-papers/mobility-report/ dataforecasts/iot-connections-outlook ?gclid=CjwKCAjwvdajBhBEEiwAeMh1 U6Eh4JZgIjS9XqxAozf0iiwbEMTKWjq U04PPTU7S2SFS2c2v3NxvvhoCdVkQ AvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds [11] Marr B. The Top 4 Internet of Things Trends In 2023. Forbes; 2022 Available from:https://www.forbes.com/sites/ bernardmarr/2022/11/07/the-top-4- internet-of-things-trends-in-2023/ [12] Research S. Internet of Things (IoT) Outlook, Growth, Report to 2030. 2023. Available from: https://straitsresearch. com/report/internet-of-things-market [13] Ayaz M, Ammad-Uddin M, Sharif Z, Mansour A, Aggoune EM. Internet-of-things (IoT)-based smart agriculture: Toward making the fields talk. IEEE Access. 2019;7:129551-129583. DOI:10.1109/access.2019.2932609 [14] Qazi S, Khawaja BA, Farooq QU. IoT-equipped and AI-enabled next generation smart agriculture: A critical review, current challenges and future trends. IEEE Access. 2022;10:21219- 21235. DOI:10.1109/access.2022.3152544 [15] Elijah O, Rahman TA,Orikumhi I, Leow CY, Hindia MN. An overview Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 22 of internet of things (IoT) and data analytics in agriculture: Benefits and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2018;5(5):3758-3773. DOI:10.1109/jiot.2018.2844296 [16] Bhuiyan MAS,Rahman M, Billah MM, Saha DK. Internet of things (IoT): A review of its enabling Technologies in Healthcare Applications, standards protocols, security, and market opportunities. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2021;8(13):10474-10498. DOI:10.1109/jiot.2021.3062630 [17] Catarinucci L,DeDonno D, Mainetti L, Palano L, Patrono L, Stefanizzi ML, etal. An IoT-aware architecture for smart healthcare systems. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2015;2(6):515-526. DOI:10.1109/ jiot.2015.2417684 [18] Kumar A, Krishnamurthi R, Nayyar A, Sharma K, Grover V, Hossain E. A novel smart healthcare design, simulation, and implementation using healthcare 4.0 processes. IEEE Access. 2020;8:118433-118471. DOI:10.1109/access.2020.3004790 [19] Kelly SDT, Suryadevara NK, Mukhopadhyay SC. Towards the implementation of IoT for environmental condition monitoring in homes. IEEE Sensors Journal. 2013;13(10):3846-3853. DOI:10.1109/ jsen.2013.2263379 [20] Dorri A, Kanhere SS,Jurdak R, Gauravaram P. Blockchain for IoT Security and Privacy: The Case Study of a Smart Home; 2017. DOI:10.1109/ percomw.2017.7917634 [21] Zanella A, Bui N, Castellani A, Vangelista L, Zorzi M. Internet of things for smart cities. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2014;1(1):22-32. DOI:10.1109/ jiot.2014.2306328 [22] Chen QB, Schaeffer JK. 22FDX® Embracing IoT, 5G, and Automotive Applications—A Perspective through Global Research; 2019. DOI:10.1109/ s3s46989.2019.9320648 [23] Kunz A, Nkenyereye L, Song J. 5G evolution of cellular IoT for V2X. 2018. DOI:10.1109/cscn.2018.8581830 [24] Fuller A, Fan Z, Day C, Barlow C. Digital twin: Enabling technologies, challenges and open research. IEEE Access. 2020;8:108952-108971. DOI:10.1109/access.2020.2998358 [25] Kumar N, Acharya D, Lohani D. An IoT-based vehicle accident detection and classification system using sensor fusion. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2021;8(2):869-880. DOI:10.1109/ jiot.2020.3008896 [26] ISHMII. Definitions: Structural Health Monitoring. (n.d.) Available from https://ishmii.org/knowledge-education- center/education/shm-glossary/ definitions/#S [Accessed: December 21, 2022] [27] Ni YQ , Xia Y, Liao WY, y Ko, J. M. Technology innovation in developing the structural health monitoring system for Guangzhou new TV tower. Structural Control and Health Monitoring. 2009;16(1):73-98. DOI:10.1002/stc.303 [28] Compán V, Pachón P, Cámara M, Lourenço PB, y Sáez, A. Structural safety assessment of geometrically complex masonry vaults by non-linear analysis. The chapel of the Würzburg residence (Germany). Engineering Structures. 2017;140:1-13. DOI:10.1016/j. engstruct.2017.03.002 [29] Alejo LE, Mendes N, Lourenço PB, y Martínez, G. Protecting the historic buildings of Mexico: The barrel vault of san Agustin church in Morelia. Journal of IoT Framework Application to SHM Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112719 23 Performance of Constructed Facilities. 2021;35(2):04020146. DOI:gppbvp [30] Pierdicca A, Clementi F, Isidori D, Concettoni E, Cristalli C, y Lenci, S. Numerical model upgrading of a historical masonry palace monitored with a wireless sensor network. International Journal of Masonry Research and Innovation. 2016;1(1):74- 99. DOI:10.1504/IJMRI.2016.074748 [31] Barsocchi P, Bartoli G, Betti M, Girardi M, Mammolito S, Pellegrini D, etal. Wireless sensor networks for continuous structural health monitoring of historic masonry towers. International Journal of Architectural Heritage. 2021;15(1):22-44. DOI:10.1080/15583058.2020.1719229 [32] Fort EH, Blanco-Carmona P, Garcia-Oya JR, Chavero FM, Carvajal RG, Serrano-Chacon AR, Mascort-Albea EJ. Wireless and Low-Power system for synchronous and Real-Time Structural- Damage assessment. IEEE Sensors Journal. 2023;23(12):13648-13658. DOI: 10.1109/jsen.2023.3270961 [33] James GH, Carne TG, Lauffer JP, Nord AR. Modal testing using natural excitation. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Modal Analysis Conference: February 3-7, 1992. San Diego, California, USA. Society for Experimental Mechanics; 1992. pp. 1209-1216 [34] Peeters B. System identification and damage detection in civil engineering [PhD thesis, Catholic University of Leuven]; 2000 [35] Van Overschee P,DeMoor B. Subspace identification for linear systems. En Springer eBooks. 1996. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-0465-4 [36] Pintelon R, Schoukens J. System Identification: A Frequency Domain Approach. 2nd ed. USA: Wiley-IEEE Press; 2012 [37] Brincker R, Zhang L, Andersen P. Modal identification from ambient responses using frequency domain decomposition. In: Proceedings of IMAC-XVIII: A Conference on Structural Dynamics: February 7-10, 2000. San Antonio, Texas, USA: Society for Experimental Mechanics; 2000. pp. 625-630 [38] Brincker R, Ventura CE, Andersen P. Damping estimation by frequency domain decomposition. In: Proceedings of IMAC-XIX: A Conference on Structural Dynamics: February 5-8, 2001. Kissimmee, Florida, USA. Society for Experimental Mechanics; 2001. pp. 698-703 [39] Rytter A. Vibrational based inspection of civil engineering structures [PhD thesis, Aalborg University]. 1993. Available from: https://vbn.aau.dk/ files/18588667/Vibrational_Based_ Inspection_of_Civil_Engineering_ Structures [40] Bisio I, Garibotto C, Lavagetto F, Sciarrone A. A novel IoT-based edge sensing platform for structure health monitoring. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2022—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS). Virtual Conference; 2022. DOI:10.1109/ infocomwkshps54753.2022.9797953 [41] Zou Z, Bao Y, Li H, Spencer BF, Jinping O. Embedding compressive sensing-based data loss recovery algorithm into wireless smart sensors for structural health monitoring. IEEE Sensors Journal. 2015;15(2):797-808. DOI:10.1109/jsen.2014.2353032 [42] Zonzini F, Dertimanis V, Chatzi E, Marchi LD. System identification at the extreme edge for network load reduction in vibration-based monitoring. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. Bridge Engineering – Recent Advances and Applications 24 2022;9(20):20467-20478. DOI:10.1109/ jiot.2022.3176671 [43] Mobile IoT Deployment Map. Internet of Things. 2023 https://www. gsma.com/iot/deployment-map/ [44] NB-IoT & LTE-M. Summary— GSA. 2023. Available from: https://gsacom.com/paper/ nb-iot-lte-m-march-2023-summary/ [45] 1NCE Precios. 1NCE.2023. Available from: https://1nce.com/es-es/1nce- connect/10-euros-por-10-anos [46] Zini G, Betti M, Bartoli G, Chiostrini S. Frequency vs time domain identification of heritage structures. Procedia Structural Integrity. 2018;11:460-469. DOI:10.1016/j. prostr.2018.11.115 [47] Saisi A, Terenzoni S, Ruccolo A, Gentile C. Safety of the architectural heritage: Structural assessment of the Zuccaro’s Tower in Mantua. En Springer eBooks. 2019. pp. 2422-2430. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-99441-3_260 [48] Bayraktar A, Altunişik AC, Birinci F, Sevim B, Türker T. Finiteelement analysis and vibration testing of a two-span masonry arch bridge. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities. 2010;24(1):46-52. DOI:10.1061/(ASCE) CF.1943-5509.0000060 [49] Pepi C, Gioffrè M, Comanducci G, Cavalagli N, Bonaca A, Ubertini F. Dynamic characterization of a severely damaged historic masonry bridge. Procedia Engineering. 2017;199:3398- 3403. DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.579 [50] Venanzi I, Kita A, Cavalagli N, Ierimonti L, Ubertini F. Earthquakeinduced damage localization in an historic masonry tower through longterm dynamic monitoring and FE model calibration. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. 2020;18(5):2247-2274. DOI:10.1007/s10518-019-00780-4 [51] Standoli G, Salachoris GP, Masciotta MG, Clementi F. Modalbased FE model updating via genetic algorithms: Exploiting artificial intelligence to build realistic numerical models of historical structures. Construction and Building Materials. 2021;303:124393. DOI:10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2021.124393 [52] Costa C, Arêde A, Costa A, Caetano E, Cunha Á, Magalhães F. Updating numerical models of masonry arch bridges by operational modal analysis. International Journal of Architectural Heritage. 2015;9(7):760- 774. DOI:10.1080/15583058.2013.850557 [53] Costa C, Ribeiro D, Jorge P, Silva R, Arêde A, Calçada R. Calibration of the numerical model of a stone masonry railway bridge based on experimentally identified modal parameters. Engineering Structures. 2016;123:354-371. DOI:10.1016/j. engstruct.2016.05.044 [54] Magalhães F, Cunha Á. Explaining operational modal analysis with data from an arch bridge. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing. 2011;25(5):1431- 1450. DOI:10.1016/j.ymssp.2010.08.001 [55] Kortiš J, Daniel Ľ, Farbák M, Maliar L, Škarupa M. Operational modal analysis of the cable-stayed footbridge. Civil and Environmental Engineering. 2017;13(2):92-98. DOI:10.1515/ cee-2017-0012 [56] Diord S, Magalhães F, Cunha Á, Caetano E. High spatial resolution modal identification of a stadium suspension roof: Assessment of the estimates uncertainty and of modal contributions. Engineering Structures. 2017;135:117-135. DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.12.060