2000
DOI: 10.1080/13682199.2000.11784343
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermographic non-destructive testing damage detection for metals and cementitious materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If the location of the damage is known a priori, the practitioner may rely on interrogating the structure using ultrasound [1], eddy current [2], X-ray [3], and thermography [4]. The more general vibration-based approach to SHM assumes no such knowledge and requires only that observations of the structure's healthy dynamic response be made in order to classify subsequent data as coming from a damaged structure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the location of the damage is known a priori, the practitioner may rely on interrogating the structure using ultrasound [1], eddy current [2], X-ray [3], and thermography [4]. The more general vibration-based approach to SHM assumes no such knowledge and requires only that observations of the structure's healthy dynamic response be made in order to classify subsequent data as coming from a damaged structure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of these procedures are: the acoustic emission (Li et al, 2011), infrared thermography (Shih et al, 2000), ultrasound (Voigt et al, 2003), image processing (Nishikawa et al, 2012), eddy currents (Banks et al, 2002), and radiographs (Vossoughi et al, 2007); which are all used in assessing structural damage. However, the aforementioned methods possess several disadvantages; for instance, it is required that the location of the damage be known a priori, the section of the structure under inspection needs to be easily accessible and in several cases, the structures must be closed temporarily during its inspection (Curadelli et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nowadays, several classical and dynamical methods have been proposed for assessing structural damage. The classical methods consist of visual or experimental localization procedures, such as the acoustic emission (Li et al, 2011), infrared thermography (Shih et al, 2000), ultrasound (Tuzzeo and di Scalea, 2002), eddy currents (Banks et al, 2002), radiographs (Vossoughi et al, 2007), and image processing (Nishikawa et al, 2012). However, the aforementioned methods need not only a priori knowledge of the damaged region, but also accessibility to the vicinity of damage (Curadelli et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%