Identification of Localized Void Defects in Composite by Recurrence Quantification Analysis of Ultrasonic Backscattered Signal
Source abstract
Abstract
Voids usually have a detrimental effect on the performance of carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP). This paper presents a nonlinear dynamic method, known as recurrence quantification analysis (RQA), for the identification of localized void defects. First, five standard CFRP specimens with known porosity ranging from 0.2 to 5.94% are tested using ultrasonic pulse-echo technique, and the obtained backscattered signals are subsequently analyzed by RQA. The result shows that two RQA characteristic parameters, the recurrence rate and the Shannon entropy, both clearly increase with increasing porosity. Next, the RQA is performed on another CFRP specimen with unknown porosity. Two regions in this specimen containing localized void defects are detected based on the above finding. This result is finally verified by a destructive experiment. The research demonstrates that RQA is an effective new method for the identification of localized void defects in CFRP.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Machine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. Liu, L., Zhang, B.M., Wang, D.F., et al., Experimental characterization of porosity and interlaminar shear strength in polymeric matrix composites, J. Aeronaut. Mater., 2006, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 115–118.
2. Jeong, H. and Hsu, D.K., Experimental analysis of porosity induced ultrasonic attenuation and velocity change in carbon composites, Ultrasonics, 1995, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 195–203.10.1016/0041-624X(95)00023-V ↗
3. Martin, B.G., Ultrasonic wave propagation in fiber-reinforced solids containing voids, J. Appl. Phys., 1977, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 3368–3373.10.1063/1.324176 ↗
4. Lin, L., Luo, M., Guo, G., et al., Ultrasonic determination of carbon fiber composite porosity using acoustic impedance, Acta Mater. Compositae Sin., 2009, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 105–110.
5. Dwivedi, A., Gupta, R.K., Varma, R.K., et al., Effect of processing and microstructure on ultrasonic response of aerospace alloys: an overview, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2016, vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 703–709.10.1134/S1061830916120056 ↗
6. Grolemund, D. and Tsai, C.S., Statistical moments of backscattered ultrasound in porous fiber reinforced composites, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Eng., 1998, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 295–304.10.1109/58.660140 ↗
7. Roberts, R.A., Porosity characterization in fiber-reinforced composites using ultrasonic backscatter, in Con. Rev. Progr. Quantit. NDE, San Diego, USA, 1986.
8. Chen, Y.C., Zhou, X.J., Yang, C.L., et al. The ultrasonic evaluation method for the porosity of variable-thickness curved CFRP workpiece: using a numerical wavelet transform, Nondestr. Test. Eval., 2014, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 195–207.10.1080/10589759.2014.914206 ↗
9. Kim, K.B., Hsu, D.K., and Daniel, J.B., Estimation of porosity content of composite materials by applying discrete wavelet transform to ultrasonic backscattered signal, NDT&E Int., 2013, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 10–16.10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.01.014 ↗
10. Karabutov, A.A. and Podymova, N.B., Nondestructive porosity assessment of CFRP composites with spectral analysis of backscattered laser-induced ultrasonic pulses, J. Nondestr. Eval., 2013, vol. 32, pp. 315–324.10.1007/s10921-013-0184-x ↗
11. Eckmann, J.P., Kamphorst, S.O., and Ruelle, D., Recurrence plots of dynamical systems, Epl., 1987, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 973–977.10.1209/0295-5075/4/9/004 ↗
12. Marwan, N., Romano, M.C., Thiel, M.,et al., Recurrence plots for the analysis of complex systems, Phys. Rep., 2007, vol.438, no.5&6, pp. 237–329.10.1016/j.physrep.2006.11.001 ↗
13. Wang, Y., Chen, S.J., Liu, S.J., et al., Best wavelet basis for wavelet transforms in acoustic emission signals of concrete damage process, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2016, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 125–133.10.1134/S1061830916030104 ↗
14. Loana, C., Digulescu, A., Serbanescu, A., et al., Recent advances in non-stationary signal processing based on the concept of recurrence plot analysis, in Translational Recurrences, Springer Int. Publ., 2014, pp. 75–93.
15. Chen, J., Li, Y.A., and Wang, D.H., Underwater acoustic signal processing based on recurrence plot, J. Harbin Eng. Univ., 2006, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 649–652.
16. Liang, Q.Z., Guo, X.M., Zhang, W.Y., et al., Identification of heart sounds with arrhythmia based on recurrence quantification analysis and Kolmogorov entropy, J. Med. Biol. Eng., 2015, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 209–217.10.1007/s40846-015-0022-y ↗
17. Kwuimy, C.A.K., Adewusi, S.A., and Nataraj, C., Characterization of the vibration transmitted in the human arm using selected recurrence quantification parameters. Nonlinear Dyn., 2017, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 1–15.10.1007/s11071-017-3417-1 ↗
18. Carrión, A., Miralles, R., and Lara, G., Measuring predictability in ultrasonic signals: an application to scattering material characterization, Ultrasonics, 2014, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 1904–1911.10.1016/j.ultras.2014.05.008 ↗
19. Brandt, C., Recurrence quantification analysis as an approach for ultrasonic testing of porous carbon fiber reinforced polymers, in Recurrence Plots and Their Quantifications: Expanding Horizons, Springer Int. Publ., 2016.
20. Ramm, A.G., Wave Scattering by Small Bodies of Arbitrary Shapes, Singapore: World Sci. Publ., 2005.10.1142/5765 ↗
21. Groenenboom, J. and Snieder, R., Attenuation, dispersion, and anisotropy by multiple scattering of transmitted waves through distributions of scatterers, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 1995, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 3482–3492.10.1121/1.413780 ↗
22. Dominguez, N. and Mascarot, B., Ultrasonic non-destructive inspection of localized porosity in composite materials, in 9th Eur. Conf. Nondestr. Test., 2006, Tu.2.1.4.
23. Kachanov, V.K., Kartashev, V.G., Sokolov, I.V., et al., Problems of extracting ultrasonic signals from structural noise during inspection of articles produced from materials with complex structures, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2007, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 619–630.10.1134/S1061830907090070 ↗
24. Brandt, C.A., State space approach for the non-destructive evaluation of CFRP with ultrasonic testing, in Int. Symp. NDT Aerosp., 2015.
25. Rosenstein, M.T., Collins, J.J., and Luca, C.J.D., A practical method for calculating largest Lyapunov exponents from small data sets, Phys. D (Amsterdam, Neth.), 1993, vol. 65, pp. 117–134.
26. Takens, F., Detecting strange attractors in turbulence, in Lecture Notes Mathematics, 1981, pp.366–381.
27. Jr, W.C. and Zbilut, J.P., Dynamical assessment of physiological systems and states using recurrence plot strategies, J. Appl. Physiol., 1994, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 965–73.10.1152/jappl.1994.76.2.965 ↗
28. Kennel, M.B., Brown, R., and Abarbanel, H.D.I., Determining embedding dimension for phase-space reconstruction using a geometrical construction. Phys. Rev. A, 1992, vol. 45, pp. 3403–3411.10.1103/PhysRevA.45.3403 ↗
29. Fraser, A.M. and Swinney, H.L., Independent coordinates for strange attractors from mutual information, Phys. Rev. A, 1986, vol. 33, pp. 1134–1140.10.1103/PhysRevA.33.1134 ↗
30. Schinkel, S., Dimigen, O., and Marwan, N., Selection of recurrence threshold for signal detection, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top., 2008, vol. 164, no. 1, pp. 45–53.10.1140/epjst/e2008-00833-5 ↗