4.6 Article

Evaluation of Corrosion Damage in Sulfate-Attacked Concrete by CT, Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing and AHP Methods

期刊

SENSORS
卷 22, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s22083037

关键词

corrosion evaluation; sulfate attack; ultrasonic pulse velocity; coarse aggregate; CT test; AHP

资金

  1. Initiation Fund for Postdoctoral Research of Central South University [228697]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an evaluation method of corrosion damage for sulfate-attacked concrete using CT and ultrasonic velocity testing. The coarse aggregate information was extracted using CT, and the proportion of coarse aggregate in the ultrasonic test line was calculated. The degree of sulfate corrosion in the concrete structure was evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results show that this evaluation method can accurately assess the corrosion damage in sulfate-attacked concrete structures.
Coarse aggregate in concrete is basically free from sulfate corrosion. If the influence of the coarse aggregate in the concrete is not eliminated, the change amount of the concrete ultrasonic pulse velocity value is directly used to evaluate the damage degree of sulfate corrosion in the concrete, and the results are often inaccurate. This paper presents an evaluation method of corrosion damage for the sulfate-attacked concrete by CT, ultrasonic velocity testing and AHP methods. CT was used to extract the coarse aggregate information in the specimen, and the proportion of coarse aggregate on the ultrasonic test line was calculated based on CT image analysis. Then, the correction value of ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) of the concrete structure was calculated, and the sulfate corrosion degree of concrete structure was evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results show that the evaluation method proposed in this paper could more accurately evaluate the corrosion damage in the sulfate-attacked concrete structures, and the evaluation results were more in line with reality.

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

4.6
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