| Literature DB >> 31569440 |
Gang Ding1,2, Chunbo Xiu3, Zhenkai Wan4, Jialu Li5,6, Xiaoyuan Pei7,8, Zhenrong Zheng9.
Abstract
Acoustic emission (AE) source localization is one of the important purposes of nondestructive testing. The localization accuracy reflects the degree of coincidence between the identified location and the actual damage location. However, the anisotropy of carbon fiber three-dimensional braided composites will have a great impact on the accuracy of AE source location. In order to solve this problem, the time-frequency domain characteristics of AE signals in a carbon fiber braided composite tensile test were analyzed by Hilbert-Huang transform (HHT), and the corresponding relationship between damage modes and AE signals was established. Then, according to the time-frequency characteristics of HHT of tensile acoustic emission signals, the two-step method was used to locate the damage source. In the first step, the sound velocity was compensated by combining the time-frequency analysis results with the anisotropy of the experimental specimens, and the four-point circular arc method was used to locate the initial position. In the second step, there is an improvement of the Drosophila optimization algorithm, using the ergodicity of the chaotic algorithm and congestion adjustment mechanism in the fish swarm algorithm. The smoothing parameters and function construction in the probabilistic neural network were optimized, the number of iterations was reduced, the location accuracy was improved, and the damage mode of composite materials was obtained. Then, the damage location was obtained to achieve the purpose of locating the damage source.Entities:
Keywords: carbon fiber braided composites; four-point arc method; location of damage source; probabilistic neural network; two step method
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31569440 PMCID: PMC6803981 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24193524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Three-dimensional four-directional carbon fiber braided composites: (A) Structural sketch of internal reinforcement; (B) Surface morphology of carbon fiber braided composites; (C) Side morphology of carbon fiber braided composites.
Figure 2The tensile process of the 3D braided composites.
Figure 3Change in the load-displacement curve corresponding with the acoustic emission (AE) ignal energy parameter of carbon fiber braided composites.
Figure 4AE signal Hilbert–Huang transform (HHT) spectrum of carbon fiber braided composites.
Corrected parameters of acoustic velocity.
| Sensor | Velocity (103m/s) | Relative Distance(mm) | Relative Time (s) | Modified Parameters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensor 1 | 5.143 | 25 | 4.861 | 0 |
| Sensor 2 | 5.069 | 25 | 4.932 | 0.071 × 10−6 |
| Sensor 3 | 4.781 | 25 | 5.229 | 0.368 × 10−6 |
| Sensor 4 | 4.826 | 25 | 5.180 | 0.319 × 10−6 |
Comparison of the actual location of AE source with the calculated location of four-point circular arc.
| Lead Break Location (mm) | Calculated Location (mm) | Error (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | Y | X | Y | X | Y |
| 3.000 | 4.000 | 3.296 | 4.334 | 9.857 | 8.346 |
| 5.000 | 3.000 | 5.463 | 3.239 | 9.267 | 7.953 |
| −3.000 | 5.000 | −3.270 | 5.489 | 8.998 | 9.785 |
| −6.000 | 7.000 | 6.554 | 7.660 | 9.231 | 9.428 |
| −5.000 | −6.000 | −5.469 | 6.503 | 9.389 | 8.389 |
| −8.000 | −4.000 | −8.679 | −4.382 | 8.482 | 9.542 |
| 6.000 | −9.000 | 6.590 | −9.890 | 9.833 | 9.889 |
| 10.000 | −8.000 | 11.012 | −8.820 | 10.123 | 10.251 |
Figure 5Logistic mapping Lyapunov exponential graph.
Improvement of optimization performance of Drosophila optimization algorithm.
| Function | Optimal Point | Global Extremum | Average Absolute Error of Global Extremum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Drosophila Optimization Algorithm | Improved Drosophila Optimization Algorithm | |||
|
| (1.0, 1.0) | 0.0 | 0.0031 | 0.0002 |
|
| (0.0, −1) | 3.0 | 0.0574 | 0.0261 |
|
| (−31.9783, −31.9783) | 0.998004 | 0.1717 | 0.0862 |
|
| (0.0, 0.0) | −1.0 | 0.0279 | 0.0086 |
|
| (−0.0898, 0.7126) | −1.031628 | 0.087 | 0.0139 |
|
| (0.0, 0.0) | 0.0 | 0.0548 | 0.0102 |
Figure 6Optimization of probabilistic neural network based on improved fruit fly optimization algorithm.
Comparison of locations of tensile damage sources.
| Lead Break Location (mm) (x, y) | Standard Drosophila Computational Position (mm) | Error (%) | Improved Drosophila Computational Position (mm) | Error (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (x, y) | (x, y) | |||
| (1.000, 0.500) | (1.053, 0.525) | (5.345, 4.967) | (1.010, 0.505) | (1.012, 0.934) |
| (3.000, 1.000) | (2.880, 1.030) | (−3.987, 4.023) | (2.970, 1.009) | (−0.986, 0.894) |
| (−1.000, 0.800) | (−1.052, 0.762) | (5.167, −4.793) | (−1.011, 0.793) | (1.078, −0.925) |
| (−6.000, 1.200) | (−5.726 1.172) | (−4.568, −3.368) | (−5.946, 1.188) | (−0.899, −0.967) |
| (−5.000, −0.700) | (−5.248, −0.733) | (4.962, 4.678) | (−5.052, −0.707) | (1.038, 0.978) |
| (−7.000, −0.900) | (−6.782, −0.945) | (−3.109, 3.991) | (−6.932, −0.910) | (−0.971, 1.058) |
| (6.000, −1.000) | (6.254, −1.047) | (4.239, 4.725) | (6.053, −1.009) | (0.891, 0.898) |
| (4.000, −0.600) | (3.840, −0.569) | (−3.993, −4.234) | (3.957, −0.594) | (−1.079, −0.983) |
Figure 7Location of Damage Source in Tensile Test.