4.7 Review

Corrosiveness mapping of bridge decks using image-based analysis of GPR data

期刊

AUTOMATION IN CONSTRUCTION
卷 80, 期 -, 页码 104-117

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.03.004

关键词

Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE); Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR); Concrete bridge decks; Corrosiveness mapping; Bridge inspection

资金

  1. Ministere des Transports du Quebec (MTQ) [R730.1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), a locating instrument by design, has attracted much interest as a non-destructive inspection technique for bridge decks due to its ease of use and ability to detect corrosion. The most commonly used technique to interpret GPR data is numerical analysis. The assessment method relies on the fact that corroded reinforcing bars, which cause signal attenuation, can be easily identified using GPR scans. However, several other unrelated factors can attenuate GPR signals such as reinforcing bar depth, surface anomalies and reinforcing bar spacing. These anomalies can be falsely interpreted as deterioration using numerical analysis. Image-based analysis overcomes these drawbacks through analyzing the entire GPR profile while considering prior knowledge of the structure characteristics, thus determining the state of bridge deck. The main objective of this research is to develop a systematic framework of the image-based analysis. The framework is supported by various GPR profiles depicting several causes of signal attenuation and their analysis with respect to deterioration or rebar corrosion status. Two case studies are presented and analyzed using numerical analysis, image based analysis, and other Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) techniques. The results are compared to confirm the validity of the proposed methodology. Further validation is done using concrete cores. The developed approach is believed to assist transportation agencies in a more informed decision making process through highlighting areas of actual deterioration. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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