Low-Cost, Low-Power Edge Computing System for Structural Health Monitoring in an IoT Framework
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Firstly, a new firmware architecture has been developed, enabling integration into the standardized IoT layer stack and its application to the SHM field.
- Additionally, another contribution is the implementation of the Decrement Technique (RDT) and its application to SHM, effectively reducing the amount of information to be transmitted wirelessly. As a result, the autonomy of the deployed devices in the field is maximized.
- From the perspective of the application server, an IoT big data architecture has been implemented. This architecture facilitates the direct application of structural identification algorithms and high-computational-capacity artificial intelligence techniques. These advancements enable more robust and efficient analysis of structural health data.
2. Material and Methods
- The perception layer consists of a series of low-power wireless monitoring nodes with local processing capabilities that enables edge computing capabilities, which are responsible for collecting the physical quantities related to the behaviour of the structure. This solution proposes the use of Random Decrement Time (RDT) to minimize the amount of data to be transmitted wirelessly and therefore reduce the amount of energy consumed. In addition to local processing, these samples will be processed in the application server to determine the modal characteristics of the structure.
- Network layer: this is the infrastructure in charge of establishing a bidirectional communication channel between the nodes of the perception layer and the application layer using NB-IoT technology.
- Processing layer: This is the layer composed of the infrastructure that houses the application layer as well as the necessary elements, both hardware and system, for its correct operation. It is responsible for integrating the non-relational database services, the processing backend, the data processing engine for both static and machine learning algorithms, and the network services.
- Application layer: This is the set of applications deployed in the processing server that add value to the information collected by the perception layer to offer it to the user, who is responsible for managing the monitored infrastructure. In the presented solution, it is made up of both the decoder/encoder that is responsible for encrypting/decryption the information in the uplink/downlink direction and the user interface and the processing algorithms housed in the processing layer.
2.1. System Design
2.1.1. Perception Layer
- Real-Time Clock (RTC) Alarm A and RTC Alarm B: These tasks are associated with two native peripherals of the microcontroller that remain active during the Sleep Mode phase. The first one is a timer that, every 25 s, feeds the WatchDog Timer (WDT). RTC Alarm B is associated with the timer in charge of waking up the microprocessor and initiating Active Mode. This allows the microcontroller to restart in case it enters an unknown working state.
- vFOTA (Firmware Over The Air): Its functionality is to check if there is a new firmware version available for its installation. It is important to note that the node always retains the last properly functioning firmware version in its memory, so that if the new installation suffers any failure, the node can revert to the previous code version, avoiding the node’s disabling. This task is of vital importance in IoT applications, particularly in scenarios where deployments are extensive, geographically dispersed, and located in challenging access areas, both bureaucratically and physically. Without this capability, upgrading devices in the field would significantly increase maintenance costs, which is one of the key objectives of the presented development.
- vInit: Once the new firmware version has been installed or it has been checked that there is no new firmware version, this task is in charge of launching the measurement tasks of all the sensors installed in the node (through data queues), allowing them to acquire data concurrently. Additionally, it oversees launching the vMemo, vFrameManager and vModemManager tasks.
- vAcel, vTemp, vHum and vGPS: These are the tasks in charge of acquiring information from the monitored structure and managing the power consumption modes of each sensor. Each task is dedicated to a specific sensor and handles its activation, data acquisition, and control of energy consumption. From an architectural point of view, having a modular design with a task for each sensor provides enough versatility to activate or deactivate any sensor, or even add new sensors, without the need to modify the existing tasks. The vGPS task is especially important, as it acquires the GPS time signal, which is common to all deployed nodes, and assigns it to the internal clock of the microcontroller, ensuring the time synchronization between them while not having a significant impact on the power consumption of the whole node [27].
- vProc: This is the task in charge of processing the collected acceleration data before storing it in memory, which minimizes the memory depth required for storage. To achieve this, the task applies the RDT technique to the acceleration samples collected from the structure. The implementation and validation of this technique and its impact on node autonomy are detailed in Section 3.2. Although the task is presented with a single data input for clarity, it supports input from any sensing task, if necessary.
- vMemo: This task receives the data acquired by the sensing tasks or the results of the vProc task through data queues and stores them in the flash memory until they are successfully sent to the application layer.
- vFrameManager: This is the task in charge of reading data from the flash memory and organizing them into data frames to send to the central remote server.
- vModemManager: This task is responsible of establishing the NB-IoT connection (when the node is activated) and sending the data coming from vFrameManager through MQTT topic publications (Transmission Control Protocol—TCP) with an SSL security certificate.
- vSleepMode: The vSleepMode task plays a crucial role in optimizing power consumption. After successfully sending all data to the IoT application layer, this task activates the very-low-power mode. It suspends all the operating system tasks and gives the corresponding commands to the microprocessor to configure the RTC A and B alarms for the next operation cycle.
- vDebug: This task serves as a valuable tool for developers and users of the node. It receives and displays relevant information of all the tasks that are being executed in the microcontroller according to the verbose level established, on which the detail of the information displayed depends.
2.1.2. Network Layer
2.1.3. Cloud Application Server
- Database: This is the element that stores all the system’s information, both that sent by the nodes and that generated by the high-level applications, such as the firmware versions of each of the nodes. This implies the storage of highly heterogeneous information, which makes it necessary to use a non-relational database technology.
- Decoder: This is the microservice responsible for decoding the information received by the nodes. This decoding is carried out according to the common data model known by both the vFrameManager of the perception layer and the decoder of the cloud application server. At this point, the authenticity of the information is also checked, as well as the validity of the information, considering its own encoding and the CRC included in the useful data.
- Encoder: The main functionality of this service is the encoding of the information sent downlink to the devices, primarily focused on firmware updates for the nodes. In the same way as in the uplink, the information sent (in this case a binary file) is encoded according to the data model known by both the encoder and the vFota task.
- Processing: This is the service in charge of transforming and leveraging the valuable information received from the nodes. In the presented solution, this service focuses on analyzing the data acquired by the deployed accelerometers and extracting the natural frequencies of the monitored structures using the Stochastic Subspace Identification (SSI) methodology [34]. Additionally, it is responsible of processing the rest of the information coming from the nodes, such as the meteorological operating conditions of the structure, from which the limit working conditions to which the structure is subjected are extracted. The aim is to incorporate these conditions into the calculation of the structure’s useful life, enabling a more accurate assessment of its durability and performance over time.
- Graphical User Interface: The user interface, shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5, has been developed based on a series of web views using JavaScript as the programming language as well as to register all the actions performed by all the services and users and to guarantee their traceability. The services offered by the GUI are the following:
- ○
- A scheme of access and/or editing permissions applicable to the different users that guarantees the security of the data stored and offers the user only the information and services available according to their role, which, given that these are strategic structures, is of vital importance.
- ○
- Detailed management (editing, creation, deletion, etc.) of both the monitored structures and the deployed nodes, as well as the sensors available and the information collected by each of them. This allows the geopositioning of each node in map view (Figure 4) and the presentation of the information from the different sensors in both numerical and graphical table mode (Figure 5).
- ○
- The processing block makes it possible to exploit the information collected by the nodes. In the presented application, this entails calculating and monitoring the fundamental frequencies of monitored structures. It also involves managing alarms through email, SMS, or visual notifications on the interface when these frequencies deviate beyond a configurable threshold, indicating potential damage to the monitored structure. Additionally, this block combines the obtained results with data acquired from official government seismographs, providing an integrated response that adds value to the system and aligns with the state-of-the-art practises.
- ○
- It also offers an interface for exporting and importing data, which potentially allows its integration with other market monitoring solutions.
3. Results
- Characterization of the node’s power consumption and dispatch times (Section 3.1) by quantifying the impact of the RDT application (Section 3.2);
- Performance comparison and validation against a high-precision reference hardware and software system (Commercial System 1) in a pilot structure (Section 3.3);
- Validation against another high-performance commercial hardware and software system (Commercial System 2) at the Eduardo Torroja bridge in Posadas (Córdoba, Spain) (Section 3.4).
3.1. Sensor Node Characterization: Power Consumption
- GPS connection: An average consumption of 31.56 mA for 40.77 s;
- Wireless network connection: This includes SSL authentication and has an average consumption of 59.46 mA for 64.07 s;
- Data acquisition: An average consumption of 4.77 mA for 480 s;
- Data transmission: An average consumption of 63.09 mA for 1383.91 s.
3.2. RDT Application to IoT-SHM: Implementation and Quantifying Power Consumption Saving
3.3. Pilot Structure Test
3.4. Eduardo Torroja Bridge Test
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Farrar, C.R.; Worden, K. Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning Perspective; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farrar, C.R.; Worden, K. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 2007, 365, 303–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Richardson, M.H. Detection of Damage in Structures from Changes in Their Dynamic (Modal) Properties, a Survey; NUREG/CR-1431; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Washington, DC, USA, 1980.
- Pepi, C.; Gioffré, M.; Comanducci, G.; Cavalagli, N.; Bonaca, A.; Ubertini, F. Dynamic characterization of a severely damaged historic masonry bridge. Procedia Eng. 2017, 199, 3398–3403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Conde, B.; Ramos, L.F.; Oliveira, D.V.; Riveiro, B.; Solla, M. Structural assessment of masonry arch bridges by combination of non-destructive testing techniques and three-dimensional numerical modelling: Application to Vilanova bridge. Eng. Struct. 2017, 148, 621–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, J.P. A Summary Review of Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks for Structural Health Monitoring. Shock Vib. Dig. 2006, 38, 91–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamburger, R.O. A Policy Guide to Steel Moment-Frame Construction; Technical Report No. 354; Federal Emergency Management Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
- Cunha, A.; Caetano, E. Experimental Modal Analysis of Civil Engineering Structures. Sound Vib. 2006, 40, 12–20. [Google Scholar]
- Salehi, H.; Burgueño, R.; Chakrabartty, S.; Lajnef, N.; Alavi, A.H. A comprehensive review of self-powered sensors in civil infrastructure: State-of-the-art and future research trends. Eng. Struct. /Eng. Struct. (Online) 2021, 234, 111963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, J.P. An Overview of Wireless Structural Health Monitoring for Civil Structures. Philos. Trans. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2007, 365, 345–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ha, D.H.; Park, H.S.; Choi, W.G.; Kim, Y. A Wireless MEMS-Based Inclinometer Sensor Node for Structural Health Monitoring. Sensors 2013, 13, 16090–16104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Haus, J.N.; Lang, W.; Roloff, T.; Rittmeier, L.; Bornemann, S.; Sinapius, M.; Dietzel, A. MEMS Vibrometer for Structural Health Monitoring Using Guided Ultrasonic Waves. Sensors 2022, 22, 5368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shang, B.-L.; Song, B.-F.; Chang, F. New Sensor Technologies in Aircraft Structural Health Monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Condition Monitoring and Diagnosis, Beijing, China, 21–24 April 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassani, S.; Dackermann, U. A Systematic Review of Advanced Sensor Technologies for Non-Destructive Testing and Structural Health Monitoring. Sensors 2023, 23, 2204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabato, A.F.; Feng, M.Q.; Fukuda, Y.; Carní, D.L.; Fortino, G. A Novel Wireless Accelerometer Board for Measuring Low-Frequency and Low-Amplitude Structural Vibration. IEEE Sens. J. 2016, 16, 2942–2949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Ou, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, C.; Li, L. Development of Wireless MEMS Inclination Sensor System for Swing Monitoring of Large-Scale Hook Structures. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 56, 1072–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.; Koo, K.; Liu, C.; Fei, X. Development of a low-cost vision-based real-time displacement system using Raspberry Pi. Eng. Struct./Eng. Struct. (Online) 2023, 278, 115493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Guo, J.; Mo, H.; Zhou, X.; Han, Y. Fiber Optic Sensing Technology and Vision Sensing Technology for Structural Health Monitoring. Sensors 2023, 23, 4334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomez, J.; Zubia, J.; Aranguren, G.; Durana, G.; Illaro, J.A.; Saez, I.; Kirchhof, M.; Poisel, H.; Hartl, E. Comparing Polymer Optical Fiber (POF), fiber Bragg gratings and traditional strain gauge for aircraft structural health monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Avionics, Fiber-Optics and Photonics Technology Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 30 September–2 October 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Costa Antunes, P.; Lima, H.F.; Alberto, N.; Rodrigues, H.; Pinto, P.; De Lemos Pinto, J.; Nogueira, R.N.; Varum, H.; Costa, A.; De Brito Andre, P.S. Optical Fiber Accelerometer System for Structural Dynamic Monitoring. IEEE Sens. J. 2009, 9, 1347–1354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pham, Q.; Ta, Q.; Park, J.; Kim, J. Raspberry Pi Platform Wireless Sensor Node for Low-Frequency Impedance Responses of PZT Interface. Sensors 2022, 22, 9592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sapidis, G.; Naoum, M.; Papadopoulos, N.; Voutetaki, M. Flexural Damage Evaluation in Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams Using a PZT-Based Health Monitoring System. In International RILEM Conference on Synergising Expertise towards Sustainability and Robustness of CBMs and Concrete Structures; Springer Nature Switzerland: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 957–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tokognon, C.A.; Gao, B.; Tian, G.Y.; Yan, Y. Structural Health Monitoring Framework Based on Internet of Things: A Survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 2017, 4, 619–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmud, M.A.; Bates, K.; Wood, T.; Abdelgawad, A.; Yelamarthi, K. A complete Internet of Things (IoT) platform for Structural Health Monitoring (SHM). In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 4th World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Singapore, 5–8 February 2018; pp. 275–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montori, F.; Zyrianoff, I.; Gigli, L.; Calvio, A.; Venanzi, R.; Sindaco, S.; Sciullo, L.; Zonzini, F.; Zauli, M.; Testoni, N.; et al. An IoT Toolchain Architecture for Planning, Running and Managing a Complete Condition Monitoring Scenario. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 6837–6856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bisio, I.; Garibotto, C.; Lavagetto, F.; Sciarrone, A. A Novel IoT-based Edge Sensing Platform for Structure Health Monitoring. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2022-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), New York, NY, USA, 2–5 May 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fort, E.H.; Blanco-Carmona, P.; Garcia-Oya, J.R.; Chavero, F.M.; Carvajal, R.G.; Serrano-Chacon, A.R.; Mascort-Albea, E.J. Wireless and Low-Power System for Synchronous and Real-Time Structural-Damage Assessment. IEEE Sens. J. 2023, 1, 13648–13658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pachón, P.; Castro, R.L.; García-Macías, E.; Compán, V.; Puertas, E.E. Torroja’s bridge: Tailored experimental setup for SHM of a historical bridge with a reduced number of sensors. Eng. Struct. 2018, 162, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cantieni, R. Experimental methods used in system identification of civil engineering structures. In Proceedings of the International Operational Modal Analysis Conference (IOMAC), Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–27 April 2005; pp. 249–260. [Google Scholar]
- Iqbal, M.; Abdullah, A.Y.M.; Shabnam, F. An Application Based Comparative Study of LPWAN Technologies for IoT Environment. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Region 10 Symposium (TENSYMP), Dhaka, Bangladesh, 5–7 June 2020; pp. 1857–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stanco, G.; Botta, A.; Frattini, F.; Giordano, U.; Ventre, G. On the performance of IoT LPWAN technologies: The case of Sigfox, LoRaWAN and NB-IoT. In Proceedings of the ICC 2022-IEEE International Conference on Communications, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 16–20 May 2022; pp. 2096–2101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 1NCE Precios. (May 2023). 1NCE. Available online: https://1nce.com/es-es/1nce-connect/10-euros-por-10-anos (accessed on 7 May 2024).
- Swamy, S.N.; Jadhav, D.; Kulkarni, N. Security threats in the application layer in IOT applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud) (I-SMAC), Palladam, India, 10–11 February 2017; pp. 477–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peeters, B.; De Roeck, G. Stochastic System Identification for Operational Modal Analysis: A Review. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control-Trans. ASME 2001, 123, 659–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carpinteri, A.; Lacidogna, G.; Pugno, N.M. Structural damage diagnosis and life-time assessment by acoustic emission monitoring. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2007, 74, 273–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigues, J.; Brincker, R. Application of the Random Decrement Technique in Operational Modal Analysis. In Proceedings of the 1st International Operational Modal Analysis Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–27 April 2005; Brincker, R., Møller, N., Eds.; Aalborg Universitet: Aalborg, Denmark, 2005; pp. 191–200. [Google Scholar]
- Cole, H., Jr. On-the-line analysis of random vibrations. In Proceedings of the 9th Structural Dynamics And Materials Conference, Palm Springs, CA, USA, 1–3 April 1968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vesterholm, K.K.; Brincker, R.; Brandt, A. Random decrement technique for detection and characterization of nonlinear behavior. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 143, 106841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.; Chiang, D.Y. A modified random decrement technique for modal identification from nonstationary ambi- ent response data only. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2012, 26, 1687–1696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ku, C.J.; Cermak, J.E.; Chou, L. Random decrement-based method for modal parameter identification of a dynamic system using acceleration responses. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2007, 95, 389–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torbol, M. Real-Time Frequency-Domain Decomposition for Structural Health Monitoring Using General- Purpose Graphic Processing Unit. Comput.-Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2014, 29, 689–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asmussen, J.C. Modal Analysis Based on the Random Decrement Technique-Application to Civil Engineering Structures; University of Aalborg: Aalborg, Denmark, 1997; Available online: https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/316396018/ (accessed on 24 April 2024).
- Kasımzade, A.A.; Tuhta, S.; Aydin, H.; Günday, F. Investigation of Modal Parameters on Steel Model Bridge Using EFDD Method. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Technology and Science, Burdur, Turkey, 14–16 November 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Bedon, C.; Bergamo, E.; Izzi, M.; Noé, S. Prototyping and Validation of MEMS Accelerometers for Structural Health Monitoring—The Case Study of the Pietratagliata Cable-Stayed Bridge. J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 2018, 7, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Komarizadehasl, S.; Lozano, F.; Lozano-Galant, J.A.; Ramos, G.; Turmo, J. Low-Cost Wireless Structural Health Monitoring of Bridges. Sensors 2022, 22, 5725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ref | FFT-512 | FFT-1024 | FFT-2048 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hz | Hz | Error (%) | Hz | Error (%) | Hz | Error (%) | |
Mode 1 | 3.32 | 3.32 | 0 | 3.32 | 0.24 | 3.26 | 1.59 |
Mode 2 | 3.82 | - | - | 3.82 | 0.05 | 3.76 | 3.14 |
Mode 3 | 5.42 | 5.67 | 4.63 | 5.54 | 2.36 | 5.54 | 2.25 |
Mode 4 | 5.91 | - | - | 5917 | 0.11 | 5.85 | 0.91 |
Mode 5 | 7.15 | 7.15 | 0.12 | 7.15 | 0.12 | 7.21 | 0.86 |
Mode 6 | 7.76 | - | - | 7.76 | 0.09 | 7.76 | 0.09 |
Mode 7 | 8.13 | 8.13 | 0.07 | 8.13 | 0 | 8.13 | 0.07 |
Ref | FFT-σ | FFT- | FFT-2 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hz | Hz | Error (%) | Hz | Error (%) | Hz | Error (%) | |
Mode 1 | 3.32 | 3.77 | 13.61 | 3.32 | 0.24 | 3.32 | 0.24 |
Mode 2 | 3.82 | 4.00 | 4.89 | 3.82 | 0.05 | 3.82 | 0.05 |
Mode 3 | 5.42 | 5.20 | 4.00 | 5.54 | 2.36 | 5.54 | 2.36 |
Mode 4 | 5.91 | 5.84 | 1.13 | 5.91 | 0.11 | 6.41 | 8.47 |
Mode 5 | 7.15 | - | - | 7.15 | 0.12 | 7.15 | 0.12 |
Mode 6 | 7.76 | 7.91 | 1.98 | 7.76 | 0.09 | 7.76 | 0.09 |
Mode 7 | 8.13 | 8.2 | 0.86 | 8.13 | 0 | 8.13 | 0.86 |
Commercial System (Hz) | This Work (Hz) | Difference (%) | |
---|---|---|---|
Mode 1 | 5617 | 5676 | 1.05 |
Mode 2 | 708 | 7091 | 0.155 |
Mode 3 | 11,035 | 11,062 | 0.244 |
Modes | Reference System (Hz) [28] | This Work (Hz) | Difference (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Mode 1 | 3.28 | 3296 | 0.48 |
Mode 2 | 3.68 | 3723 | 1.17 |
Mode 3 | 3.80 | - | - |
Mode 4 | 5.14 | 5188 | 0.93 |
Mode 5 | 5.61 | - | - |
Mode 6 | 5.64 | 5737 | 1.72 |
Mode 7 | 7.79 | 7751 | 0.5 |
Mode 8 | 8.02 | 8118 | 1.22 |
Feature | Commercial System: Pilot Structure | Commercial System: Eduardo Torroja Bridge | This Work |
---|---|---|---|
Accelerometer | 352C33 | GMSplus | ADXL355 |
Acquisition System | SIRIUS-8xACC | GMSplus | This work |
Accelerometer accuracy | 24b ϵ − ∆ ADC | 24b ϵ − ∆ ADC | 20 bits |
Power Supply (Vdc) | 9–36 | 12.5–18 | 3.6 |
Autonomy (years) | - | - | 10 (once a day) |
Management Platform | No | No | Yes |
Price | EUR 12,200 | EUR 8000/unit | EUR 175/unit |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hidalgo-Fort, E.; Blanco-Carmona, P.; Muñoz-Chavero, F.; Torralba, A.; Castro-Triguero, R. Low-Cost, Low-Power Edge Computing System for Structural Health Monitoring in an IoT Framework. Sensors 2024, 24, 5078. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24155078
Hidalgo-Fort E, Blanco-Carmona P, Muñoz-Chavero F, Torralba A, Castro-Triguero R. Low-Cost, Low-Power Edge Computing System for Structural Health Monitoring in an IoT Framework. Sensors. 2024; 24(15):5078. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24155078
Chicago/Turabian StyleHidalgo-Fort, Eduardo, Pedro Blanco-Carmona, Fernando Muñoz-Chavero, Antonio Torralba, and Rafael Castro-Triguero. 2024. "Low-Cost, Low-Power Edge Computing System for Structural Health Monitoring in an IoT Framework" Sensors 24, no. 15: 5078. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24155078
APA StyleHidalgo-Fort, E., Blanco-Carmona, P., Muñoz-Chavero, F., Torralba, A., & Castro-Triguero, R. (2024). Low-Cost, Low-Power Edge Computing System for Structural Health Monitoring in an IoT Framework. Sensors, 24(15), 5078. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24155078