| Literature DB >> 30841530 |
Jicheng Zhang1, Chuan Zhang2,3, Jiahao Xiao4, Jinwei Jiang5.
Abstract
It is important to conduct research on the soil freeze⁻thaw process because concurrent adverse effects always occur during this process and can cause serious damage to engineering structures. In this paper, the variation of the impedance signature and the stress wave signal at different temperatures was monitored by using Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT) transducers through the electromechanical impedance (EMI) method and the active sensing method. Three piezoceramic-based smart aggregates were used in this research. Among them, two smart aggregates were used for the active sensing method, through which one works as an actuator to emit the stress wave signal and the other one works as a sensor to receive the signal. In addition, another smart aggregate was employed for the EMI testing, in which it serves as both an actuator and a receiver to monitor the impedance signature. The trend of the impedance signature with variation of the temperature during the soil freeze⁻thaw process was obtained. Moreover, the relationship between the energy index of the stress wave signal and the soil temperature was established based on wavelet packet energy analysis. The results demonstrate that the piezoceramic-based electromechanical impedance method is reliable for monitoring the soil freezing and thawing process.Entities:
Keywords: Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT); electro-mechanical impedance (EMI) method; smart aggregates; soil freeze–thaw process
Year: 2019 PMID: 30841530 PMCID: PMC6427408 DOI: 10.3390/s19051107
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The electromechanical impedance model of a Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT)-driven structural system.
Figure 2Experimental materials: (a) PZT-based smart aggregate; (b) K-type thermal transducer; (c) Soil sample; (d) Soil particle size distribution.
Figure 3Experimental setup.
Figure 4Soil temperature with variation of time.
Figure 5Impedance variation during the soil freezing process: (a) the first observed resonant frequency peak (RFP); (b) the second observed resonant frequency peak.
Figure 6Impedance variation during the soil thawing process: (a) the first observed resonant frequency peak; (b) the second observed resonant frequency peak.
Figure 7Resonant frequency shift (RFS) versus temperature.
Figure 8Variation of impedance at resonant frequencies with temperature.
Figure 9Variation of SA3 signals: (a) Freezing process; (b) Thawing process.
Figure 10Variation of the wavelet packet energy index during the freeze–thaw process.