Experimental Vibration-based Damage

Detection in Aluminum Plates and Blocks

Using the Acoustic Emission Signals

NDTiC 2015

Edmonton, AB

M. Mirsadeghi, M. Sanati, R. Hugo, S. Park

Department of Mechanical & Manufacturing EngineeringSchulich School of Engineering at the University of Calgary

ND

T in C

anada 2015 Conference, June 15-17, 2015, E

dmonton, A

B (C

anada) - ww

w.ndt.net/app.N

DT

Canada2015

Outline

• Introduction

• Objective

• Experimental Setup

• Results

• Discussion

• Summary

2

Introduction:

NDE Motivation

3

Why NDE? Preventing:

� Crack propagation in pipelines� Fatigue and fracture in aircraft

structures and engine blades

� Explosions in boilers and nuclear

facilities

� Crack initiation in bridges

Applications� Pipelines and Corrosion monitoring

� Aerospace structures� Civil infrastructures: Ship hulls,

bridges and buildings

� Composite Damage Detection

AcellentTechnologies Inc

Demands� Safe and stable operation of

structures � Enhancing Maintenance Strategies

� Cost effective and reliable NDT

Introduction

4

Challenges:

• Limitation in applying high frequency excitation

• Mostly suitable for rotating

machinery

• Noise and signal spikes

• Defect classification uncertainty

Vibration-based Damage Detection

Advantages:

• Independent to the structural complexity

• Calculation weight

• Global method (compared to

radiography and conventional ultrasonic methods)

• Can be applied in working

conditions

NDT Methods X-ray

Ultrasonic

Eddy Current

Magnetic Particle Testing

Introduction:

Literature Review

5

Vibration-based Damage Detection by GA

(Hao et al 2002)

Effect of Delamination Axial Position on Natural Frequencies

(Zou et al 2000)

Development of Vibration-based Structural damage Detection (Composite Airfoil Model and Given

Damage Status)(Yan et al 2007)

Note:Using AE sensors instead of accelerometers to provide more sensitivity to higher frequency components.

Introduction:

Literature Review

6

Steel pipeline on air-bed and placement of accelerometer

(He and Zhu 2011)

Cantilever steel beam damage detection

(Golubovic 2014)

Application of CWT in Vibration-based Damage Detection

(Rucka et al. 2006)

Locating Damage Using CWT in Beams(Qiu et al. 2014)

Objectives

7

Vibration based damage detection using AE sensors, and investigating the effect of sensor position

A. Implementation of the experimental procedure and computing FRFs

� Instrumentation and data acquisition

� Processing the signal and plotting FRFs

� Repeating experiments

B. Modal parameters extraction and analysis

� Analyzing variation of the modal parameters

� Mode sensitivity discussion

Experimental Setup

8

Target Structure Properties

Material Aluminum 6061

Dimensions

Plate 152x76x6.3 mm

Block 1 (B1) 152x50.8x25.4 mm

Block 2 (B2) 152x50.8x38.1mm

Boundary ConditionsFree (Using Foam 15cm

thickness)

a. Plate (152x76x6.3 mm) b. Block 1 (152x50.8x25.4mm) c. Block 2 (152x50.8x38.1 mm)

Test Steps

1 Healthy Structure

2 Damage 1 through hole 8mm diameter

3 Damage 2 through hole 12.5mm diameter

Experimental Setup

Sensors

9

Acoustic Emission Sensors (MISTRAS Nano 30)Purpose of AE sensors is to detect the motion of stress waves that cause a local dynamic material displacement and convert this displacement to an electrical signal.

Dynamic Specifications

Peak Sensitivity, Ref V/(m/s) 62 dB

Operating Frequency Range 125-750 KHz

Resonant Frequency, RefV/(m/s) 140 KHz

Weight 2 grams

Note: the measured physical quantity of the AE sensors is

proportional to velocity, contrary to displacement or acceleration

Results

10

The figures have been prepared based on following considerations:

1. Analyzed frequency range: 1-12500 Hz

FRFs windowed to the most sensitive modes.

2. Eight natural frequency for plate

Analysis for the first two natural frequencies due to higher amplitudesin actuation signal power spectrum

3. Two natural frequencies for blocks based on the sensor location.

Results

Specimen: Plate

11

Healthy Damage 1 Damage 2

fn (Hz)Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ

Plate

Sensor 1Mode 1 3778 2.85E-01 -4.33E+08 3777 2.46E-01 -3.92E+08 3771 1.88E-01 -2.29E+08

Mode 2 5754 5.29E-01 -4.01E+09 5726 4.17E-01 -4.71E+09 5644 5.00E-01 1.40E+09

Sensor 2Mode 1 3786 2.29E-02 -2.25E+09 3782 1.60E-01 -3.57E+08 3773 1.39E-01 -3.60E+08

Mode 2 5760 5.97E-01 6.65E+08 5699 4.78E-01 7.52E+08 5658 1.86E-01 8.42E+08

Natural frequency sensitivity for plate specimen

ResultsPlate – Sensor in Position 1 – Mode 2

12

Results

Specimen: Block 1

13

Healthy Damage 1 Damage 2

fn (Hz)Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ

Block 1

Sensor 1Mode 1 8554 4.67E-02 1.83E+09 8557 3.86E-02 6.15E+09 8533 3.83E-02 8.33E+09

Mode 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sensor 2Mode 1 7810 7.49E-01 9.65E+09 7666 1.09E+00 7.25E+09 7467 7.20E-01 2.55E+10

Mode 2 8592 1.71E-01 -2.68E+10 8599 3.51E-01 1.13E+10 8568 1.78E-01 2.29E+10

Natural frequency sensitivity for block 1 specimen

ResultsBlock 1 – Sensor in Position 2 – Mode 1

14

Results

Specimen: Block 2

15

Healthy Damage 1 Damage 2

fn (Hz)Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ fn (Hz)

Damping

Ratio (%)κ

Block 2

Sensor 1Mode 1 8674 4.17E-02 4.63E+09 8687 4.47E-02 4.33E+09 8680 3.77E-02 2.76E+10

Mode 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 8723 4.72E-02 4.67E+10

Sensor 2Mode 1 8702 1.86E-01 -2.55E+10 8710 1.04E-01 1.60E+10 8748 3.55E-01 8.70E+09

Mode 2 9125 2.46E-01 -7.84E+10 8972 1.67E-01 2.70E+10 8748 3.55E-01 8.70E+09

Natural frequency sensitivity for block 2 specimen

ResultsBlock 2– Sensor in Position 2- Mode 1 and 2

16

Discussion

17

• The AE sensors can successfully be utilised for detection of material

discontinuity in the structure by monitoring modal parameters of the specimen

• Mode sensitivity in plate specimen

• The significance of sensor positioning for the block specimen

• Different trend for natural frequencies variation in experiments for block 2.

• As the acoustic emission sensors have been used we can not provide exact units for the FRFs, however the measured quantity is proportional to the velocity.

Discussion

18

Assumptions

• Free-free boundary condition using the 15cm thickness foam.

• Same hammer impact point

• Negligible effect for the adhesive material used for mounting the AE sensors to the structure

Limitations

• Low frequency analysis, Excitation signal frequency limitation (Max 12500 Hz)

• Unable to compare mode shapes unless many sensors are used

• Insensitive modes to specific damages

• Units in FRFs

Summary

19

• Extracted modal parameters using the acoustic emission data. This method

which is global and independent of geometrical complexities can be used to detect crack initiation/propagation in pipelines.

• It was shown that certain modes of vibration for the different specimens provides more sensitivity to the damage and is preferred to be used for damage

detection.

• Sensor location effect in terms of observability of different modes of the

structure.

Future Work• Parametric FE study using a verified numerical model• Extending studies to high frequency excitation signal

• Investigation of various kinds of defects (corrosion, fatigue crack, etc.)

Thank You

20