A hybrid laser thermography approach for quantifying concrete crack width
Source abstract
Abstract
Accurately quantifying crack width is crucial for assessing concrete structure serviceability and durability, yet remains challenging for conventional non-destructive techniques. This study develops a rigorous Laser Spot Thermography (LST) methodology for the quantitative evaluation of surface crack width in concrete. A closed-loop framework integrating theoretical analysis, detailed finite element modelling, and experimental validation was established. A high-fidelity 3D transient thermal model with a Gaussian heat source was developed and experimentally validated to simulate heat-crack interaction, showing a mean absolute error below 2% for absolute temperature prediction at the laser spot centre and 4.3% for the crack temperature differential (ΔTc). Systematic parametric analysis using ΔTcidentified the laser-to-crack distance as the most critical parameter, with optimal sensitivity at 2.5 mm. A distinct saturation effect was observed for crack depths beyond 5 mm due to limited thermal diffusion in concrete. A robust quantitative model relating ΔTc to crack width (w) was formulated as a logarithmic function. This work establishes LST as a precise quantification technique, providing a practical pathway for its integration into structural health monitoring systems for non-destructive measurement of fine concrete cracks.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Thermography and Photoacoustic Techniques · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Fire effects on concrete materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
China University of Mining and Technology
Harbin Engineering University
Funding
Xuzhou Industrial Key Technology Research and Development Projects
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2006.01.00910.1016/j.cemconres.2006.01.009 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.02310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.023 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.00110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.001 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.sna.2006.08.00510.1016/j.sna.2006.08.005 ↗
5. 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2003)17:4(255)10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2003)17:4(255) ↗
6. 10.1007/s10921-023-00958-510.1007/s10921-023-00958-5 ↗
7. 10.1080/09349847.2021.196947610.1080/09349847.2021.1969476 ↗
8. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2003)15:3(28710.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2003)15:3(287 ↗
9. 10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00021-X10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00021-X ↗
10. 10.3233/JAE-22002110.3233/JAE-220021 ↗
11. 10.1063/1.36266210.1063/1.362662 ↗
12. 10.3390/buildings1412392810.3390/buildings14123928 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.eswa.2025.12783410.1016/j.eswa.2025.127834 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2021.10762910.1016/j.optlastec.2021.107629 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2019.03.00310.1016/j.ndteint.2019.03.003 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.02.02710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.02.027 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.11022810.1016/j.optlastec.2023.110228 ↗
18. 10.3390/ma1419564410.3390/ma14195644 ↗
19. 10.1115/1.404987110.1115/1.4049871 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2011.09.00610.1016/j.ndteint.2011.09.006 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.infrared.2015.05.00410.1016/j.infrared.2015.05.004 ↗
22. 10.1007/s10921-016-0348-110.1007/s10921-016-0348-1 ↗
23. 10.1088/0957-0233/24/4/04560210.1088/0957-0233/24/4/045602 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.sna.2016.07.02210.1016/j.sna.2016.07.022 ↗
25. 10.1007/s10921-014-0245-210.1007/s10921-014-0245-2 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.10.03410.1016/j.compstruct.2018.10.034 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2021.10249410.1016/j.ndteint.2021.102494 ↗
28. 10.1080/10589759.2024.238421810.1080/10589759.2024.2384218 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.02610.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.026 ↗
30. 10.3390/ma1711256510.3390/ma17112565 ↗