Advertisement

Experimental Techniques

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 25–40 | Cite as

Modified Dual Piezo Configuration for Improved Structural Health Monitoring Using Electro-Mechanical Impedance (EMI) Technique

  • S. Adhikari
  • S. BhallaEmail author
Article
  • 76 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents a new variant of the electro-mechanical impedance (EMI) technique encompassing sensor-actuator dual configuration for improved damage assessment. In this arrangement, called as dual piezo configuration (DPC), an outer piezoelectric ring acts as the actuator and an inner piezoelectric disc as the sensor. The configuration yields better results than the conventional EMI configuration employing the same piezo patch as the sensor as well as the actuator. This paper presents a more practical and modified version of DPC entailing a group of normal commercially available PZT patches. The piezo sensor configurations evaluated in the paper are: (a) single piezo configuration (SPC), which is conventionally employed in the EMI technique; (b) dual piezo configuration (DPC), which consists two different patches in ring type configuration; and (c) modified dual piezo configuration (MDPC), which uses four outer piezo patches for the actuation and a centrally located piezo patch for the sensing purpose. The paper first covers the comparison of the three configurations through finite element method (FEM), using an aluminum block of dimensions 48 × 48 × 10 mm as the host structure and lead zirconate titanate (PZT) patches of size 10 × 10 × 0.3 mm, analyzed through coupled field analysis. The simulation study is followed by an experiment on the aluminum block of the same size and finally on a prototype steel plate of dimensions 1200 × 970 × 8 mm. Simulation results and experimental data prove that the proposed MDPC is much more sensitive to the occurrence than the conventional SPC. Also, MDPC ensures much larger zone of influence as compared to the conventional SPC as well as the DPC and it commands higher sensitivity. Hence, it can be employed on the large structures to detect damage, which is not possible by using the SPC which may warrant very large number of sensors. Thus, the proposed MDPC approach can be practically employed to detect the damage in large civil, mechanical and aerospace structures.

Keywords

Structural health monitoring (SHM) Lead zirconate titanate (PZT) Electro-mechanical impedance (EMI) technique Dual piezo configuration (DPC) Modified dual piezo configuration (MDPC) Sensors Actuators 

References

  1. 1.
    Kessler, S. (2002), “Piezoelectric-based in-situ damage detection of composite materials for structural health monitoring systems,” PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aktan AE, Catbas FN, Grimmelsman KA, Tsikos CJ (2000) “Issues in infrastructure health monitoring for management”, Journal of Engineering Mechanics. ASCE 126(7):711–724Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhalla S, Soh CK (2003) Structural impedance based damage diagnosis by Piezo-transducers. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 32(12):1897–1916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Naidu A, Soh C, Pagalthivarthi K (2006) Bayesian network for E/M impedance-based damage identification. J Aerosp Eng (ASCE) 20(4):227–236Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Soh CK, Tseng KKH, Bhalla S, Gupta A (2000) Performance of smart Piezoceramic patches in health monitoring of a RC bridge. Smart Mater Struct 9(4):533–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Naskar S, Bhalla S (2016) Metal wire based twin 1D orthogonal Array configuration of PZT patches for damage assessment of 2D structures. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 27(11):1440–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Talakokula V, Bhalla S (2014) Reinforcement corrosion assessment capability of surface bonded and embedded piezo sensors for RC structures. J Intell Mater Sys Struct 26(17):2304–2313Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lim YY, Soh CK (2012) Effect of varying axial load under fixed boundary condition on admittance signatures of electromechanical impedance technique. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 23(7):815–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moharana S, Bhalla S (2012) Numerical investigation of shear lag effect on PZT-structure interaction: review and application. Curr Sci 103(6):685–696Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Song H, Lim HJ, Sohn H (2013) Electromechanical impedance measurement from large structures using a dual piezoelectric transducer. J Sound Vib 332:6580–6595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liang C, Sun FP, Rogers CA (1994) Coupled electro-mechanical analysis of adaptive material systems-determination of the actuator power consumption and system energy transfer. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 5:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    PI Ceramic (2015) Product Information Catalogue, Lindenstrabe, Germany, http://www.piceramic.de
  13. 13.
    Inc ANSYS (2015) ANSYS reference manual. Canonsburg, PA, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bhalla S, Soh CK (2004) Structural health monitoring by Piezo-impedance transducers. I : Modelling. J Aerosp Eng ASCE 17(4):154–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lim YY, Soh CK (2014) Towards more accurate numerical modeling of impedance based high frequency harmonic vibration. Smart Mater Struct 23(3):035017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moharana, S. (2013), “Modelling of Piezo structure Elastodynamic interaction through bond layer for electro mechanical impedance technique”, PhD thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Adhikari, S. (2015), “Dual Piezo system for structural health monitoring using EMI technique”, M. Tech. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agilent Technologies (2015), “Agilent VEE pro Quick start Guide” (http://www.agilent.com)

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Presently Lecturer, IOE Pashchimanchal CampusTribhuvan UniversityPokharaNepal
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (IIT) DelhiNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations