4.7 Article

Wooden beam damage evaluation under bending loading based on the integration of acoustic emission and principal component analysis

期刊

MEASUREMENT
卷 222, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2023.113569

关键词

Wooden beam; Acoustic emission; Principal component analysis; Comprehensive evaluation index; Damage stage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a comprehensive evaluation index based on acoustic emission (AE) technology and principal component analysis (PCA) to address the issue of low accuracy of any single AE parameter in identifying damage to wooden beams caused by accumulative damage. The proposed index can divide the damage evolution process of wooden beams into four stages and determine the time of crack initiation. The proposed wooden beam damage detection method based on AE technique provides a reference for further research on the damage evolution mechanism of wooden structures and in situ monitoring methods.
This paper proposes a comprehensive evaluation index based on the combination of acoustic emission (AE) technology and principal component analysis (PCA) to address the issue of low accuracy of any single AE parameter in identifying damage to wooden beams caused by accumulative damage. Four-point bending tests were conducted on wooden beams to monitor the process of performance degradation and evaluate damage progress. The results indicate that the proposed comprehensive evaluation index can divide the damage evolution process of wooden beams into four stages: initial compaction, elastic deformation, crack propagation, and instability fracture. These stages are consistent with the mechanical properties of wooden beams. The time of crack initiation can also be determined according to the comprehensive evaluation index value. The proposed wooden beam damage detection method based on the AE technique provides a reference for further research on the damage evolution mechanism of wooden structures and in situ monitoring methods.

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

4.7
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