4.6 Article

Non-Destructive Testing for Cavity Damages in Automated Machines Based on Acoustic Emission Tomography

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 22, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s22062201

Keywords

non-destructive testing; acoustic emission tomography; cavity damage detection; ray tracing

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2021YFC2900500]
  2. Hunan Province Academic Degree and Postgraduate Education Reform Research Project [2020JGZD014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Damage detection is crucial for maintenance of automated machines. This paper proposes an acoustic emission tomography method that combines the fast sweeping method and the limited-memory Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno method to detect cavity damage in automated machines. The results show the effectiveness of this new approach in real-time detection of cavity damage in continuous and homogeneous materials.
Damage detection is important for the maintenance of automated machines. General non-destructive testing techniques require static equipment and complex analysis processes, which restricts the maintenance of automated machines. Therefore, this paper proposes an acoustic emission (AE) tomography method for detecting cavity damage in automated machines, combining the fast sweeping method (FSM) and the limited-memory Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno (L-BFGS) method. This approach overcomes the limitations of real-time AE detection for cavity damage in continuous and homogeneous materials. The proposed method has been applied in numerical and laboratory experiments to validate its feasibility. The results show that the inversed low-velocity regions correspond to the actual cavity regions, and the sources of cavity damage can be effectively detected. This paper provides a new perspective for AE testing technologies, and also lays the foundation for other non-destructive testing techniques, in terms of cavity damage detection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available