4.3 Article

Impact-Echo Defect Detection in Reinforced Concrete Bridge Decks without Overlays

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001638

关键词

-

资金

  1. Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the use of impact-echo testing to detect various types of defects in reinforced concrete bridge decks. Results show that impact echo is generally effective at responding to the presence of delaminations, voids, deterioration, and poorly constructed concrete in bridge decks without overlays. The study also observes how defect thickness, size, and depth affect detectability.
To effectively manage their inventory, transportation authorities are switching to nondestructive testing methods, such as the impact-echo method, to facilitate locating subsurface defects in reinforced concrete bridge decks. In this study, 17 bridge deck specimens with simulated delaminations, voids, deterioration, and poorly constructed concrete were fabricated at different moisture contents to determine what types of defects of varying size and depth can be detected using impact-echo testing. A modified receiver operator characteristic analysis was conducted to assess which types of defects can be discerned from sound concrete. Frequency contour plots for each specimen were used to evaluate how defect characteristics, such as delamination thickness, affect defect detectability. Results indicate that impact echo is generally effective at responding to the presence of delaminations, voids, deterioration, and poorly constructed concrete in bridge decks without overlays. It was found that moisture content does not significantly influence impact-echo readings. This paper also presents other observations regarding how defect thickness, size, and depth affect detectability. The findings of this study support a more effective nondestructive evaluation of in-service concrete bridge decks without overlays using impact-echo testing. (C) 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据