The Use of Low Profile Piezoelectric Sensors for Impact and Acoustic Emission (AE) Detection in CFRC Structures

Abstract

This paper describes some of the issues that have been investigated as part of a programme called “DECODA” to develop low profile sensors for impact and Acoustic Emission (AE) detection in composite materials. Under the programme a number of sensing techniques are being investigated based upon piezoelectric, optical and Micro-machined Electro-Mechanical Sensor (MEMS) technologies. This paper concentrates on sensors based upon piezoelectric materials.

As a comparison of the types of piezoelectric sensors available this study has looked at three types. The first two were based upon a 200 mm thick Lead-Zirconia-Titanate (PZT) ceramic and a 500 mm Calcium modified Lead-Titanate (PTCa-1)(qf)/epikote piezoelectric composite respectively, fabricated into what will be described as low profile sensors. As a comparison the third sensor was a commercially available broad band PZT transducer with an integrated amplifier built in (WDI-PAC ltd.). The results indicate that whilst the broad band sensors can be over 10 times as sensitive as the low profile sensors, the signals generated are potentially large enough to detect AE in composites.

AE detection in Carbon Fibre Reinforced Composites (CFRC) is complicated in comparison with metallic structures due to the complex nature of AE propagation in anisotropic materials. A brief study of the complexities of AE propagation has shown that while these issues are a problem, AE detection and source location is still possible using real time algorithms. The biggest challenge is to be able to identify the key information from the AE source and separate out this information from signal shaping by the structure, sensor and processing hardware. It is desirable to be able to identify and size damage modes but as yet there does not appear to be enough understanding of composite AE for this to be possible in the near future.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blanas, P. , Wenger, M. , Shuford, R. and Das-Gupta, D. (September 18–20, 1997). Active Composite Materials and Damage Monitoring. In: Structural Health Monitoring – Current Status and Perspectives, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. Stanford University, Stanford, CA. pp. 199–207.

Chopra, I. (1996). Review of current status of smart structures and integrated systems. In: Smart Structures and Integrated Systems, Proceedings – Spie. The International Society for Optical Engineering. 2717: 20–62.

Dunegan, H. (1997). Modal analysis of acoustic emission signals. Journal of Acoustic Emission, 15(1/4): 79–87.

Giordano, M. and Calabro, A. (1998). An acoustic-emission characterisation of the failure modes in polymer-composite materials. Composite Science and Technology, 58(12): 1923–1928.

Green, E. (1998). Acoustic emission in composite laminates. Journal of Non-destructive Evaluation, 17(3): 117–128.

Hamstad, M. and Sendeckyi, G. (1993). Acoustic emission technology for smart structures. Journal of Acoustic Emission, 11(1): 33–41.

Lloyd, P. and Doran, C. (1996). Military applications of smart materials and structures. Composites Engineering, 4(8): 829–852.

Somerton, C. (1996). Acoustic properties of carbon fibre composites. BAe Internal Report, JS 13540.

Vandiver, T. (September 18–20, 1997). Health monitoring of U.S. army missilesystems. In: Structural Health Monitoring – Current Status and Perspectives, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. Stanford University, Stanford, CA. pp. 187–196.