Comparison of the electromechanical properties of embedded and surface-mounted piezoelectric transducers
Source abstract
Abstract
An experimental and computational comparison of the structural and electromechanical coupling properties of composite beams with surface-mounted and embedded piezoelectric disks shows that the embedded sensors tend to have higher electromechanical coupling coefficients due to improved strain transfer between the transducer and host material. Experimental testing of fiber–epoxy composite beams with embedded and surface-mounted piezoelectric disks under quasi-static three-point bending tests shows that bending elastic moduli and ultimate stresses are not significantly different between these two cases, while ultimate strains are greater for the surface-mounted cases compared with the embedded cases. Electromechanical coupling decreases with increasing bending loads due to either debonding between the sensor and host structure or due to damage of the brittle piezoelectric material. Embedded sensors tend to show a smaller degradation in electromechanical coupling with increasing stress level.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Smart Materials for Construction
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, USA
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1109/TUFFC.2012.229910.1109/TUFFC.2012.2299 ↗
2. 10.1007/s10443-011-9198-710.1007/s10443-011-9198-7 ↗
3. 10.1002/978047061207110.1002/9780470612071 ↗
4. 10.1177/0022034569048004060110.1177/00220345690480040601 ↗
5. 10.23919/ACC.1988.479003510.23919/ACC.1988.4790035 ↗
6. 10.1088/0964-1726/1/2/00110.1088/0964-1726/1/2/001 ↗
7. 10.1177/00219983810150030510.1177/002199838101500305 ↗
8. 10.1201/978142000570710.1201/9781420005707 ↗
9. 10.1177/1045389X1142059310.1177/1045389X11420593 ↗
10. 10.1088/0964-1726/18/2/02500910.1088/0964-1726/18/2/025009 ↗
11. 10.1002/978111999115110.1002/9781119991151 ↗
12. 10.1177/1045389X0505010310.1177/1045389X05050103 ↗
13. 10.1177/14759217020010010410.1177/147592170200100104 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.matlet.2003.08.01110.1016/j.matlet.2003.08.011 ↗
15. Hansen JP · Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures · 2000 · 11 · 90210.1177/1045389X0001101101 ↗
16. Heslehurst RB · 2013
17. 10.1117/12.71522110.1117/12.715221 ↗
18. 10.1088/0964-1726/23/12/12503710.1088/0964-1726/23/12/125037 ↗
19. 10.1016/S0263-8223(01)00027-710.1016/S0263-8223(01)00027-7 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00007-610.1016/S0266-3538(02)00007-6 ↗
21. 10.1117/12.42964610.1117/12.429646 ↗
22. 10.1088/0964-1726/13/5/01910.1088/0964-1726/13/5/019 ↗
23. 10.1088/0964-1726/7/6/01010.1088/0964-1726/7/6/010 ↗
24. Paget C (2001) Active health monitoring of aerospace composite structures by embedded piezoceramic transducers. PhD dissertation, Department of Aeronautics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
25. 10.1117/12.35071010.1117/12.350710 ↗
26. 10.1007/978-94-007-2033-610.1007/978-94-007-2033-6 ↗
27. 10.1117/12.5019310.1117/12.50193 ↗
28. Sala G, Olivier M (2004) Embedded piezoelectric sensors and actuators for control of active composite structures. Available at: http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/
29. 10.1088/0964-1726/15/6/05010.1088/0964-1726/15/6/050 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.jsv.2006.01.02010.1016/j.jsv.2006.01.020 ↗
31. 10.1143/JJAP.32.423310.1143/JJAP.32.4233 ↗
32. 10.1177/1045389X920030030510.1177/1045389X9200300305 ↗
33. 10.1177/1045389X0605589110.1177/1045389X06055891 ↗
34. 10.1177/1045389X1140630310.1177/1045389X11406303 ↗
35. 10.1117/12.38819310.1117/12.388193 ↗
36. 10.1177/1045389X1351218810.1177/1045389X13512188 ↗
37. 10.1088/0964-1726/22/1/01500210.1088/0964-1726/22/1/015002 ↗