2017
DOI: 10.1177/1475921717704638
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficient swept sine chirp excitation in the non-linear vibro-acoustic wave modulation technique used for damage detection

Abstract: In this article, the non-linear vibro-acoustic modulation technique is used for structural damage detection. A new experimental configuration and data processing strategy are proposed to improve the damage detection capability of the technique. The swept sine chirp excitation is used for both low-frequency vibration/modal and high-frequency ultrasonic excitations. The adaptive resampling procedure is then applied to extract information about modulation intensity that relates to damage. The proposed method is i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…9 Then, with the rapid development of smart materials, particularly the piezoelectric materials, 1012 several attractive structural health monitoring (SHM) approaches 1315 have been proposed, for example, the electromechanical impedance (EMI) methods 16,17 and the acousto-ultrasonic methods. 1820 Compared to the EMI method that is very sensitive to surroundings, 21,22 the active sensing method, 23,24 which is based on linear acousto-ultrasonic features, and nonlinear acousto-ultrasonic approaches (including the sub-harmonic method, 25 higher-order harmonic method, 26,27 and the vibro-acoustic modulation method) 28 have better performance in detecting bolt looseness. However, all the above methods depend on sensor deployment and constant contact between sensors and structures, which may lead to additional costs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 Then, with the rapid development of smart materials, particularly the piezoelectric materials, 1012 several attractive structural health monitoring (SHM) approaches 1315 have been proposed, for example, the electromechanical impedance (EMI) methods 16,17 and the acousto-ultrasonic methods. 1820 Compared to the EMI method that is very sensitive to surroundings, 21,22 the active sensing method, 23,24 which is based on linear acousto-ultrasonic features, and nonlinear acousto-ultrasonic approaches (including the sub-harmonic method, 25 higher-order harmonic method, 26,27 and the vibro-acoustic modulation method) 28 have better performance in detecting bolt looseness. However, all the above methods depend on sensor deployment and constant contact between sensors and structures, which may lead to additional costs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For these reasons, identification of hysteretic systems is generally a non-trivial task. Additional information about nonlinear effects related to contact-type damage can be found in [10][11][12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, there has been an increased focus on nonlinear ultrasound techniques as they have been found to be more sensitive than linear methods (Boccardi et al, 2015; Cantrell and Yost, 2001; Fierro and Meo, 2017b), and therefore in the case of a loaded structure the sensitivity of these methods may result in advantages in evaluation (Fierro and Meo, 2013). Many nonlinear ultrasound techniques have been developed over the years, which have focused on: detection and localisation of structural defects such as micro-cracks (fatigue) (Dziedziech et al, 2017; Sohn et al, 2014), delaminations (Delrue et al, 2015; Klepka et al, 2014), weak adhesive bonds and others (Guyer and Johnson, 1999; Ulrich et al, 2007), nonlinear elastic wave spectroscopy (NEWS) (Ciampa et al, 2014; Meo and Zumpano, 2005; Scalerandi et al, 2008), nonlinear elastic wave modulation (Fierro and Meo, 2015, 2017a, 2018a; Straka et al, 2008; Van Den Abeele et al, 2000) and nonlinear imaging techniques (Dionysopoulos et al, 2018; Fierro et al, 2017; Fierro and Meo, 2018b, 2019; Haupert et al, 2017; Solodov et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%