A Cluster-based Data Aggregation Architecture in
WSN for Structural Health Monitoring
Pin Nie and Bo Li
Aalto University, School of Science and Technology
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
pin.nie@tkk.fi, bo.li@tkk.fi
AbstractLimited energy is one of the principal challenges in
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). In the application of Struc-
tural Health Monitoring (SHM), overwhelming data provision is
another big problem. Data aggregation condenses raw data into
useful information and reduces redundant data transmissions.
Consequently, significant energy and data storage are saved, and
tasks can be completed more efficiently. However, it is a nontrivial
problem to organize the various data aggregation techniques
into an integrated architecture on a distributed WSN. In this
paper, we propose a cluster-based data aggregation architecture
to facilitate application development for efficient SHM. We
developed a role-based data aggregation middleware and SQL-
like user interface to support flexible task configurations. We
also implemented a prototype to evaluate operational flexibility
and energy efficiency. Our experimental results indicate that a
cluster-based data aggregation mechanism can save energy and
optimize the distribution of computing tasks.
Keywords: Wireless Sensor Network, Structural Health
Monitoring, Data Aggregation, Middleware.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Recent advances of low-cost wireless sensor networks offer
new opportunities for structural health monitoring [1], [2].
The traditional method of conducting SHM mainly relies
on a scheduled manual inspection, which is slow and risky.
Moreover, this method cannot provide constant data in real-
time about the monitored structural components. Therefore, it
is impossible to execute a persistent monitoring process, and
damage extent evaluation and structure lifetime prediction are
beyond the capability of the monitoring service. Thanks to the
development of Micro-Electro-Mechanical system (MEMS),
wired sensor networks solve the problems in the aforemen-
tioned SHM by automating data collection over the long-
term without human intervention. The structural status can be
monitored in real-time and maintenance work can be sched-
uled flexibly according to the situation. However, wired sensor
networks introduce new problems, such as cable installation
and heavy resources consumption.
As an alternative option, WSN provides compelling ad-
vantages over wired solutions, for example low-cost, fast de-
ployment in situ, localized data interrogation and autonomous
network management. Nevertheless, powered by limited bat-
tery, wireless sensor nodes will shut down sooner or later
depending on the workload. Although WSN has been tested
in real SHM applications [3], [4], [5], wide deployment are
978-1-4577-9538-2/11/$26.00 2011 IEEE
rare cases. One field test project [6] explains that a short
lifespan is the major obstacle inhibiting WSN employment in
practice. Energy harvesting technologies [7] provide a good
energy supplement. However, in many practical situations,
they are not enough to compensate for the loss of battery
life due to low efficiency and adaptability to the changing
environment. Consequently, energy saving to prolong system
lifetime remains a big challenge to adopting WSN for SHM.
Meanwhile, in the application of SHM, large volume of data
imposes a heavy burden on store and backup from the opera-
tors side periodically. Overwhelming data provision does not
only drain scarce battery on sensor nodes, but also diminishes
the significance of important events and aggravates system
management. The demand for less data and more knowledge
requires intelligent monitoring with data aggregation in the
WSN.
To take account of the challenges above, various middleware
solutions have been designed [8], [9]. In addition, a number
of data aggregation mechanisms [10], [11], [12] and clustering
algorithms [13], [14], [15] are proposed for WSNs to optimize
network topology for distributed computing. Whether these
technologies can be combined to benefit SHM is uncertain
due to the lack of implementation practice. In this paper, we
investigate several data aggregation methods regarding the ap-
plication characteristics of SHM. We demonstrate that cluster-
based data aggregation is helpful in building an efficient WSN
for intelligent SHM. By leveraging an energy-aware clustering
protocol, we can organize data aggregation methods into a
three-tier hierarchy. Based on the nodes role in the cluster, we
also integrate different filters and distribute computing tasks.
The major contribution of this study is our development
of a modular middleware on the wireless sensor nodes and
a SQL-like user interface to support task configurations at
runtime for SHM. We evaluate our prototype in terms of
energy efficiency and operational flexibility. Our experiment
results demonstrate significant energy saving and considerable
flexibility creating multiple concurrent tasks. Moreover, this
paper gives an empirical study of deployment lessons. To the
best of our knowledge, this is the first cluster-based data ag-
gregation architecture for SHM. Therefore, the study provides
a promising approach of employing WSN technologies in an
important application scenario.
546
 The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section II
studies the application characteristics of SHM and organizes
data aggregation accordingly. In Section III, we present three
components in our middleware architecture. Section IV evalu-
ates the prototype in two test cases. Finally, in Section V, we
discuss practical lessons and conclude the paper.
II. A PPLICATION CHARACTERISTICS OF SHM
In order to adopt appropriate data aggregation techniques,
we should firstly understand the application characteristics of
SHM. We collected four major features as below:
1) Network model: in a SHM system, the sensor nodes
locations are usually fixed and the mobility of sensors is
not an concern. Hence, we can assume stationary WSN
in this application. Furthermore, time synchronization of
sensor nodes are provided to measure vibration of the
structure simultaneously. These two conditions make a
clustering approach a good option for the optimization
of network topology. However, structures are often large,
complex 3D objects. An indoor environment can hardly
satisfy line-of-sight transmission. Signal attenuation and
reflection are significant effects. Therefore, multi-hop
routing and transmission latency must be considered.
Packet loss is inevitable due to the dynamics and inter-
ferences in the deployment environment, such as human
movement and WiFi access points. Therefore, we cannot
employ oversimplified network models, like 2D planar
model and unit disk graph. Quality of Service (QoS)
should be supported in data aggregation on top of a
stable network overlay.
2) Sensor measurements: in SHM, sensor measurements
include temperature, humidity, light, acceleration, wind
speed, acoustic signal and so on. We can categorize all
these measurements into two general types, namely sim-
ple measurements and multiplex measurements. Simple
measurements can be encapsulated into a single radio
packet in IEEE 802.15.4, a standard commonly used in
WSNs. The payload size cannot exceed 102 bytes in
one frame [16]. Multiplex measurements are in kilobyte
order, and streaming transmission is required to deliver
the big amount of data. Both types of measurements
should be considered in data aggregation. For simple
measurements, we can explore their spatial, temporal
and semantic correlations to concentrate information
and to identify interesting events. For multiplex mea-
surements, we need localized feature extraction and
consistency analysis to reduce data redundancy. Thus,
a combined data aggregation solution is required.
3) Scalability and longevity: the WSN scale and nodes
density for SHM may increase along with the growth
and/or deterioration of the structure. Hence, a SHM
system should allow new nodes replenishment and
seamless integration with existing WSN infrastructure.
Concerning its lifetime, the WSN should sustain from
several months up to years before the next maintenance.
The duty cycle scheduler regulates the working status of
547
sensor nodes by circulating their active and sleep modes
based on a configurable interval.
4) Location-awareness: in SHM, damage should be lo-
calized once detected. In a large structure, different
parts show different states. Monitoring parameters differ
from one place to another and also from time to time,
depending on the situation. Thus, data aggregation must
consider the sensor nodes locations to execute suitable
tasks in the right places at the right time.
Based on the characteristics analysis of the SHM application
above, we employ a hierarchical architecture to organize data
aggregation properly. We define a three-level structure to
perform data aggregation as follow:
1) Localized computation: after each sampling period, ev-
ery sensor node executes two types of computations:
filtering for simple measurements and feature extrac-
tion for multiplex measurements. The filtering operation
removes invalid measurements, which do not match
customized conditions. Feature extraction includes ac-
celeration amplitude conversion, pattern recognition of
acoustic signal and optional data compression.
2) Data aggregation: after receiving measurements from
cluster members (CM), cluster heads (CH) aggregate
the data through filtering, spatial and semantic correla-
tions. Spatial correlation summarizes the measurements
from multiple sources grouped by their types. Semantic
correlation explores the contextual relation of different
types of measurements. This level produces intermediary
results to provide a regional view of the monitored object
and/or to identify exceptional events. Filtering is used to
remove unreliable results or trivial events.
3) Distributed computing: exploits the synergy of the infor-
mation from parallel clusters. Three important concerns
are location combination, information confidence esti-
mation and inference generation. When the information
from parallel clusters are fused, locations of these data
sources should be merged too. The reliability of the
fused information should be quantified with a certain
degree of confidence. In addition, inferences can be gen-
erated from sensor measurements and/or intermediary
results.
Figure 1 illustrates the abstract architecture of our cluster-
based data aggregation. From bottom up, we execute local
filtering and feature extraction on CMs level. Data from CMs
are aggregated at CHs in the middle level and distributed
computing are performed between parallel CHs. Raw data is
concentrated into valuable information level by level in the
network until the base station. Our objective is to achieve
greater information throughput with a smaller energy footprint.
III. M IDDLEWARE ARCHITECTURE
Middleware is a novel approach to optimizing network per-
formance and facilitating application development. Therefore,
we employed a reliable, energy-aware clustering algorithm on
the middleware layer [17]. This clustering algorithm builds
 Fig. 1. Cluster-based data aggregation architecture
numerous two-level clusters based on the nodes energy and
link quality. The one-time round robin circulation of CH
guarantees load balancing and fault tolerance. The clustering
protocol allows multi-hop connection and configurable cluster
size for different WSN sizes. The clustering service provides a
stable platform to carry the data aggregation architecture. We
developed three components: filter module, data aggregation
library and SQL-like user interface. The first two components
contain several computing operations and methods, each of
which must register its identifier to a role in the cluster (CM
or CH). This scheme is to differentiate the responsibilities
of CHs and CMs in data aggregation. The user interface
receives commands from the user and constructs messages
to the network. This component also takes charge of task
management. Details of each component are described in the
following sections:
A. Filter module
Filtering is a fundamental technique to reduce redundant
data and to extract useful information which can identify
certain events or statuses. This step can also purify raw
samples to exclude noise caused by hardware jitters. For CHs,
filtering can increase the confidence of intermediary results.
In our filter module, we integrate five filters and they are
illustrated in Figure 2:
1) Threshold filter: defines the floor and/or ceiling value of
the measurement to filter out unwanted data by using
comparators (e.g., <, >, =). The threshold value(s) can
be either predefined or configured at runtime. This
filter is a straightforward solution to limit measurements
with a boundary. Consequently, it saves energy and
storage. One additional purpose of this filter is to cleanse
samples from noise caused by hardware jitters. However,
the application developer and/or system operator must
clearly define the absolute threshold values. This setting
is difficult when the occurring condition of a certain
event is unknown.
2) Deviation filter: gives an allowable variation gap be-
tween the fixed baseline value and the latest sample
value in percentage. Only when the deviation is bigger
than this percent, will the measurement be transmitted.
This filter can serve as an alarm trigger based on the
data changing at realtime. Often, dramatic changes of
548
Fig. 2. Threshold, deviation, QoI, semantic and location filters
measurements are considered as an indicator of some
events happening. Concerning the monitoring of a dy-
namic process, we also consider the previous sample
value as a changing baseline value, to denote the recent
shift ratio between two sampling periods.
3) Quality of Information (QoI) filter: is a percentage value
of dividing the number of received measurements from
CMs by the cluster size. This value is attached by the
CHs for every aggregated results. Ideally, this value
should be 100% if all cluster members perceive the same
phenomenon and transmissions have been done success-
fully. Any false transmission or undetected events can
decrease the QoI value. Thus, it implies the reliability
of the intermediary results. Application developers can
define the minimum QoI value and filter out unreliable
results.
4) Semantic filter: defines the dependency between differ-
ent measurements. This filter allows application devel-
opers to use one type of measurement as the triggering
condition to transmit another type of measurement.
Furthermore, we could generate new information based
on the occurrence of associated events.
5) Location filter: defines the physical position where data
aggregation should be performed. Application develop-
ers can set different data aggregation policies at different
locations. Location coordinates can be either preset or
loaded from an external positioning device.
B. Data aggregation library
According to our tiered architecture, we organize data
aggregation techniques into the following three-level structure.
Table 3 summarize filters and data aggregation techniques
regarding two types of cluster actors and sensor measurements:
1) Feature extraction: refers to the localized computation on
multiplex measurements. In SHM application, vibration
and acoustic measurements are often executed at high
sampling frequency, resulting in a large volume of raw
data. It is inefficient and unnecessary to transmit all
data back to the base station. Therefore, we employ a
lightweight signaling processing algorithm called Go-
ertzel [18] to convert raw acceleration into a sequence
of amplitudes at specific frequencies on the CMs. For
acoustic signals, the senor node should perform a pattern
recognition algorithm [19] for the target signal spec-
trum. It is optional whether to compress extracted data,
depending on the hardware capability. Notice that data
compression is computationally intensive and introduces
extra delay in end-to-end data transmission.
2) Data summary: includes average, maximum, minimum,
append, sum, count and difference arithmetic opera-
tions for simple measurements (AVG/MAX/MIN/APD/
SUM/CNT/DIFF). These operations are executed at
the CHs to calculate the intermediary results based
on the received measurements from the CMs. Thus,
we attach the QoI tag to indicate the confidence of
the results. Concerning vibration measurements, CHs
calculate transmissibility [20] of different locations for
damage detection.
3) Information fusion: consists of many methods and tech-
niques. In our study, we adopt the classification in the
paper [21] based on relationship among the data sources,
which defines complementary, redundant and cooper-
ative fusions. These three types of information fusion
are associated with three major issues in the distributed
computing aforementioned. The first two fusions are
considered in intra-cluster communication to combine
locations of multiple data sources and to increase con-
fidence of the fused information through data summary
operations. The third fusion attempts to generate new
inferences based on either sensor measurements from
CMs or intermediary results from CHs. Hence, this
process can happen in either intra-cluster communication
or inter-cluster communication. For example, a CH can
deduce whether the structural surface is icy, based on
the humidity, temperature and wind speed measurements
from its CMs. The CH may report ice presence to
the base station. In another case, neighbor clusters can
estimate the overall condition of a certain structural
component based on the extracted vibration features.
C. SQL-like user interface
Several WSN middleware solutions, e.g., TAG [22] and
Cougar [23], view WSN as a distributed database and provide
a SQL style user interface to retrieve data. The declarative
query language facilitates task operations by hiding low layer
characteristics from the user. Therefore, we also employ SQL
syntax in four commands to create multiple tasks including
549
Fig. 3. Cluster-based data aggregation scheme
parameters configurations and aggregation customization. The
commands syntax are described below:
1) GET statement: GET [aggregation function] [topic 1]
FROM [location] WHERE [freshness] AND [condi-
tion 1] WHEN [aggregation function] [topic 2] [con-
dition 2] AND [aggregation function] [topic 3] [condi-
tion 3];
This command creates new task(s) based on the topic
and its configurations. The duty cycle interval is defined
by freshness in seconds. Filter(s) is defined in the
condition. An associated topic in the WHEN subclause
is an affiliated task used as a semantic filter to the main
topic. The number of associated topics is limited to
two to avoid task overloading on CHs and excessive
transmission latency.
Example: GET MAX light FROM 1 WHERE freshness
= 10 AND result >100 WHEN AVG energy >80;
Meaning: report the maximum light value if it is greater
than 100 lumen from the cluster(s) in location 1. This
task is executed every 10 seconds when the average
energy of the cluster is greater than 80. Otherwise, the
task stops;
2) UPDATE statement: is similar to the GET statement for
task management. The difference is that the UPDATE
command can operate on multiple tasks to update com-
mon parameters at one time. Notice that the UPDATE
command can only be issued for the existing tasks.
New configurations will replace old settings on the same
topic.
Example: UPDATE light, temperature FROM 1 WHERE
freshness = 600;
Meaning: update the duty cycle interval to 10 minutes
on the tasks related to the topics, light and temperature
3) STOP statement: STOP [topic list] removes all tasks
related to the topic(s). The command does not operate
on an associated topic.
To encapsulate the commands in the communication pro-
tocol, we designed a generic message structure and im-
plemented three message instances as shown in Figure 4.
The message header scr id uses the last two bytes of the
IEEE 802.15.4 MAC address and identifies the source node
which publishes the data. The message header location em-
ploys binary encoding and enables location-aware routing
and data aggregation. The message headers seq num and
payload length validates the message integrity and assists the
payload parsing respectively. The SUB message creates one
 Fig. 4. Generic message structure and three message instances

task per topic and specifies configuration parameters. The field

flag indicates the wanted filter on each bit. The first two
bits of the flag tells whether this task has associated topic(s).
01 implies one associated topic in the first condition. 11
implies two associated topics in the first two conditions. The
PUB message encapsulates measurements into a hashtable
of < T opic, V alue > pairs. The NTF message notifies the
changes of the tasks related to a topic list. The field cmd type
specifies the command type and can add new values in future Fig. 5. Program structure of the cluster head
to extend functionality.
IV. P ROTOTYPE AND EVALUATION
In order to validate the energy efficiency and operational
flexibility of cluster-based data aggregation architecture, we
implemented a prototype on SunSPOT [24]. This sensor
node is equipped with powerful hardware and supports a
convenient Java programming interface. Our prototype system
uses Goertzel algorithm and transmissibility to extract features
from vibration measurements for damage detection. We use
temperature and light measurements for environmental mon-
itoring. We also use a built-in power controller to monitor
energy consumption for network management. Our testbed
consists of six sensor nodes forming one cluster on a walkway
bridge (approx. 20m*3m) between two buildings. The six
nodes can generate 15 pairs of transmissibility and provide
a segmented view of the bridge health status. This small scale
setup allows us to investigate the unit overhead before big
scale deployment. Fig. 6. Program structure of the cluster member
Figure 5 reveals the component structure of the cluster
head. CH program has two modules in its Data Processor for
local filtering and aggregation algorithms respectively. Figure
6 shows the component structure of the cluster member. The
CM program is identical to the CH program considering CM-
to-CH role transition in the case of CH failure. However,
the CM program only registers one module for local filtering
and feature extraction at runtime. Below the program, packets
are received and transmitted through messaging interfaces
provided by the clustering service. Both programs have two
concurrent threads. The communication thread deals with
packet receiving, encapsulating and transmitting. The data
processor thread handles sampling, filtering, aggregating and
feature extraction algorithms. Two threads use a shared data
cache to synchronize multiple tasks. Figure 7 illustrates the
interaction process between the CH and the CM in one duty
cycle period. At the beginning, the communication thread of
the CM listens to the messages from the CH. Meanwhile, the Fig. 7. Intra-cluster communication between cluster head and cluster member

550

Fig. 8. Vibration measurement and transmissibility calculation
data processor thread executes sampling and filtering to pre-
pare valid measurements for transmission. After transmitting
the measurements to the CH, the CM goes to the sleep mode to
save energy. We employ TDMA channel access scheme in the
cluster for reliable data transmissions from multiple sources.
After collecting measurements from all CMs, the CH executes
data aggregation and transmits intermediary results to the base
station. Afterwards, the CH goes into sleeping mode till the
next duty cycle.
We designed two test cases to evaluate the energy efficiency
and operational flexibility of the prototype. In the first test
case, we measured vibration of the rail bars on a bridge with
two policies, i.e., non-aggregation data acquisition and cluster-
based data aggregation. The previous policy simply retrieves
acceleration measurements from all sensor nodes periodically.
The latter policy built a cluster with five sensor nodes. The
CMs execute Goertzel algorithm and transmit a sequence
of amplitudes to the CH on the selected frequencies. The
CH calculates the transmissibility of sensor nodes pairs and
transmits the results to the base station. Figure 8 gives an
example of feature extraction and transmissibility calculation
with three nodes on a rail bar. Manual excitation is added on
the left side of node ID1. The rail bar is physically separated
between node ID2 and ID4. The vibration amplitude is reduced
a lot when reaching the remote node ID4. Consequently, the
transmissibility of ID1/ID4 is much bigger than the value
of ID1/ID2. This feature can indicate a possible crack in
the structure between the two locations. By further checking
the consistency with the historic data, the transmissibility of
ID2/ID4 may have abrupt changes if damage really occurs.
We measured the energy consumption of sampling, comput-
ing and transmitting by using SunSPOT API. Our calculation
is the average value of 500 duty cycles for five different data
sizes. Table 9 gives the average energy consumption of five
nodes (i.e., one cluster) per duty cycle. We can see that the
data aggregation scheme saves significant energy by over 20%,
compared with non-aggregation policy. Goertzel algorithm
551
Fig. 9. Energy saving with data aggregation on vibration measurement
Fig. 10. Routine monitoring with a threshold filter and conditional monitoring
with a semantic filter
transforms kilobytes of acceleration data into a few bytes of
amplitudes at CMs. The CH extracts features by correlating
multiple vibration measurements at different locations. The
intermediary results provide a better understanding of the
monitored structure and also reduce redundant data. In a large
WSN where many sensor nodes use multi-hop routing to
deliver data, we can expect much more energy saving with
our data aggregation middleware.
The second test case evaluates operational flexibility by
defining two concurrent tasks. Energy measurement is a rou-
tine task with a threshold filter to perform regular network
monitoring only when the system energy is low. The WSN
reports the lowest energy measurement of the sensor node
in the cluster when the minimum value is below 80 mAh.
The temperature measurement task is a conditional task with
a semantic filter for environmental monitoring. The WSN
reports a temperature measurement only when the average
light in the cluster area is bigger than 60 lumen. Figure 10 plots
the real data of these two monitoring tasks and demonstrates
the capability to execute versatile data aggregation.
V. D ISCUSSIONS AND C ONCLUSIONS
Our experiment on the bridge shows that the positions
of sensor nodes have strong influence on the credibility of
vibration measurement. There are two possible bad cases. One
case is that the sensor node is located at the knot position of
two counteracting waves. It cannot detect amplitude correctly.
The other case is that two sensor nodes are located in the po-
sitions where the same phase of the monitored wave spectrum
appears. Hence, the transmissibility of this node pair cannot
identify amplitude changes and fail to detect possible damage.
Since the monitored wave(s) propagation feature is not priori
knowledge in practice, it is impossible to predetermine bad [11] E. Fasolo, M. Rossi, J. Widmer, and M. Zorzi, In-network aggregation
deployment locations. To mitigate the two problems above, techniques for wireless sensor networks: a survey, IEEE Wireless
Communications, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 7087, april 2007.
we suggest that the distances between neighbor nodes on the [12] T. He, B. M. Blum, J. A. Stankovic, and T. Abdelzaher, Aida: Adaptive
same structural component are better not equidistant. In a big application-independent data aggregation in wireless sensor networks,
WSN for SHM, there can be large number of transmissibility ACM Transactions in Embedded Computing Systems, 2004.
[13] A. A. Abbasi and M. Younis, A survey on clustering algorithms for
values from many node pairs in one cluster. Computing all the wireless sensor networks, Computer Communications, vol. 30, 2007.
possibilities of all node pairs may not be necessary. It will be [14] K. Dasgupta, K. Kalpakis, and P. Namjoshi, An efficient clustering-
more efficient to select important node pairs and to calculate based heuristic for data gathering and aggregation in sensor networks,
in WCNC 2003: Wireless Communications and Networking, vol. 3, 2003.
their transmissibilities only. Moreover, vibration features can [15] D. Kumar, T. C. Aseri, and R. B. Patel, Eehc: Energy efficient het-
be analyzed with filtering techniques. Significant features erogeneous clustered scheme for wireless sensor networks, Computer
should be highlighted and trivial values can be discarded. As Communications, vol. 32, 2009.
[16] G. Montenegro, N. Kushalnagar, J. Hui, and D. Culler, RFC 4944:
a result, more energy and data storage will be saved and the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 Networks, 2007.
SHM system will become smarter. These improvements are [17] P. Nie, Z. Jin, and Y. Gong, Mires++: A reliable, energy-aware clus-
left for our future study. tering algorithm for wireless sensor networks, in MSWiM10: The 13th
ACM International Conference on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation
In this paper, we implemented a cluster-based data aggrega- of Wireless and Mobile Systems, 2010.
tion middleware in WSN for SHM. By leveraging an energy- [18] W. Wang, Z. Gao, L. Huang, and Y. Yao, Spectrum sensing based
aware clustering protocol, we built a role-based, three-level on goertzel algorithm, in WiCOM08: 4th International Conference on
Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, 2008.
aggregation architecture to filter unwanted samples, to extract [19] D. H. Goldberg, A. G. Andreou, P. Julian, P. O. Pouliquen, L. Riddle,
features from raw measurements and to combine multiple and R. Rosasco, A wake-up detector for an acoustic surveillance sensor
measurements from different locations. Our prototype demon- network: algorithm and vlsi implementation, in IPSN 04: Proceedings
of the 3rd international symposium on Information processing in sensor
strates the advantages of performing flexible data aggregation networks, 2004.
for energy-efficient and intelligent monitoring. [20] J. Toivola and J. Hollmen, Feature extraction and selection from
vibration measurements for structural health monitoring, in IDA 2009:
VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Proceedings of 8th International Symposium on Intelligent Data Analy-
sis, vol. 5772/2009, 2009.
We would like to thank Prof. Antti Yla-Jaa ski, Matti [21] E. F. Nakamura, A. A. F. Loureiro, and A. C. Frery, Information fusion
Siekkinen, Miika Komu, Zhonghong Ou and all our project for wireless sensor networks: Methods, models, and classifications,
ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 39, no. 3, 2007.
partners. This research is funded by Helsinki University of [22] S. Madden, M. J. Franklin, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong, Tag: a tiny
Technology (TKK) Multi-disciplinary Institute in Digitaliza- aggregation service for ad-hoc sensor networks, SIGOPS Operating
tion and Energy programme (MIDE), Intelligent Structural Systems Review, vol. 36, no. SI, 2002.
[23] Y. Yao and J. Gehrke, The cougar approach to in-network query
Health Monitoring system project (ISMO). processing in sensor networks, ACM SIGMOD Record, 2002.
[24] Sun small programmable object technology (sun spot) theory of oper-
R EFERENCES ation, Tech. Rep., 2007.
[1] J. P. Lynch, An overview of wireless structural health monitoring for
civil structures, Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 365, 2007.
[2] 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 IPSN07: Proceedings of the 6th international
conference on Information processing in sensor networks, 2007.
[3] M. Ceriotti, L. Mottola, G. P. Picco, A. L. Murphy, S. Guna, M. Corra,
M. Pozzi, D. Zonta, and P. Zanon, Monitoring heritage buildings with
wireless sensor networks: The torre aquila deployment, in IPSN09:
Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Information Pro-
cessing in Sensor Networks, 2009.
[4] N. Xu, S. Rangwala, K. K. Chintalapudi, D. Ganesan, A. Broad,
R. Govindan, and D. Estrin, A wireless sensor network for structural
monitoring, in SenSys04: Proceedings of the 2nd international confer-
ence on Embedded networked sensor systems, 2004.
[5] M. Bocca, E. I. Cosar, J. Salminen, and L. M. Eriksson, A recon-
figurable wireless sensor network for structural health monitoring, in
SHMII-4: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Structural
Health Monitoring of Intelligent Infrastructure, 2009.
[6] M. H. Iikka Hakola and E. Vesikari, Monitoring of bridges, VTT
SIMO project, Research report, 2008.
[7] S. Priya and D. J. Inman, Energy Harvesting Technologies, 2008.
[8] S. Hadim and N. Mohamed, Middleware: middleware challenges and
approaches for wireless sensor networks, IEEE Distributed Systems
Online, vol. 7, 2006.
[9] P. Costa, L. Mottola, A. L. Murphy, and G. P. Picco, Programming wire-
less sensor networks with the teenylime middleware, in Middleware07:
Proceedings of the ACM/IFIP/USENIX 2007 International Conference
on Middleware, 2007.
[10] R. Rajagopalan and P. K. Varshney, Data aggregation techniques
in sensor networks: A survey, IEEE Communications Surveys and
Tutorials, 2006.

552