| Literature DB >> 35459021 |
Dunwen Liu1, Chun Gong1, Yu Tang1, Yinghua Jian1, Kunpeng Cao1, Haofei Chen1.
Abstract
Coarse aggregate in concrete is basically free from sulfate corrosion. If the influence of the coarse aggregate in the concrete is not eliminated, the change amount of the concrete ultrasonic pulse velocity value is directly used to evaluate the damage degree of sulfate corrosion in the concrete, and the results are often inaccurate. This paper presents an evaluation method of corrosion damage for the sulfate-attacked concrete by CT, ultrasonic velocity testing and AHP methods. CT was used to extract the coarse aggregate information in the specimen, and the proportion of coarse aggregate on the ultrasonic test line was calculated based on CT image analysis. Then, the correction value of ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) of the concrete structure was calculated, and the sulfate corrosion degree of concrete structure was evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results show that the evaluation method proposed in this paper could more accurately evaluate the corrosion damage in the sulfate-attacked concrete structures, and the evaluation results were more in line with reality.Entities:
Keywords: AHP; CT test; coarse aggregate; corrosion evaluation; sulfate attack; ultrasonic pulse velocity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35459021 PMCID: PMC9027067 DOI: 10.3390/s22083037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Experimental steps.
Figure 2Ultrasonic testing system.
Figure 3Distribution of measurement.
Figure 4225 KV industrial CT.
Figure 5The processing steps of the CT images.
Judgment matrix scale and its meaning.
|
|
| Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| >0.99 | 1 | The degree of corrosion in both directions is basically the same |
| 0.95–0.99 | 2, 3 | The degree of corrosion in one direction is a little bit more serious than the other |
| 0.90–0.95 | 4, 5 | The degree of corrosion in one direction is more serious than the other |
| 0.75–0.90 | 6, 7 | The degree of corrosion in one direction is quite a bit more serious than the other |
| ≤0.75 | 8, 9 | The degree of corrosion in one direction is extremely more serious than the other |
3D judgment matrix of concrete corrosion degree.
| Target Layer |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Random average consistency indexes.
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RI | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.52 | 0.89 | 1.12 | 1.26 | 1.36 | 1.41 | 1.46 | 1.49 | 1.52 | 1.54 | 1.56 | 1.58 | 1.59 |
The evaluation classification of the relative corrosion degree.
| ADI | Relative Corrosion Coefficient | Classification |
|---|---|---|
|
| Extremely corrosion | |
|
|
| No corrosion |
|
| Mild corrosion | |
|
| Medium corrosion | |
|
| High corrosion | |
|
| Extremely corrosion |
Figure 6The extraction process of the coarse aggregate information corresponding to the ultrasonic survey line of the CT image.
Figure 7Limestone.
The UPV of the limestone (m/s).
| Samples of Limestone | Average Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5978.00 | 5960.00 | 6012.00 | 5983.33 |
| 2 | 5972.00 | 6065.00 | 5980.00 | 6005.67 |
| Average value | 5975.00 | 6012.50 | 5996.00 | 5994.50 |
Figure 8Correspondence between the ultrasonic survey line and the CT image.
Figure 9Schematic diagram of the marking the length of coarse aggregate.
Figure 10Schematic diagram of marking the length of coarse aggregate on ultrasonic measuring line (mm).
The proportion of coarse aggregate on the ultrasonic survey line.
| Direction | The Length of Coarse Aggregate (mm) | The Proportion of Coarse Aggregate ( |
|---|---|---|
|
| 16.79 | 33.58% |
|
| 22.54 | 45.08% |
|
| 40.13 | 40.13% |
Correction value of the UPV values after removing the effect of coarse aggregate (m/s).
| Direction | The Original State ( | The First Circle ( | The Second Circle ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corrected Value | Measuring Value | Corrected Value | Measuring | Corrected Value | Measuring Value | |
|
| 3068.8981 | 3670.4321 | 2963.2226 | 3569.3141 | 2908.3193 | 3516.2073 |
|
| 3159.5703 | 4015.6873 | 2956.5488 | 3832.0138 | 2832.7579 | 3716.4092 |
|
| 3085.3554 | 3831.5583 | 3009.0237 | 3760.6300 | 2924.8742 | 3681.3800 |
Figure 11Appearance changes of the concrete specimen.
The corrected and measuring UPV values of the specimen (m/s).
| The Original State | The First Circle | The Second Circle | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corrected Value | Measuring Value | Corrected Value | Measuring | Corrected Value | Measuring | |
| UPV | 3088.6018 | 3747.8150 | 2969.7133 | 3637.8654 | 2866.0668 | 3582.9285 |
The relative corrosion coefficient of the sulfate attack of the specimen.
| The Original State | The First Circle | The Second Circle | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corrected | Measuring | Corrected | Measuring | Corrected | Measuring | |
| Relative corrosion coefficient | 1 | 1 | 0.9615 | 0.9707 | 0.9279 | 0.9560 |
| Assessment Result | Mild corrosion | Mild corrosion | Medium corrosion | Mild | ||
Figure 12Three-dimensional pore distribution in the concrete specimen. (a) Pore distribution in the concrete specimen in its original state. (b) Pore distribution in the concrete specimen after the first circle. (c) Pore distribution in the concrete specimen after the second circle.
Figure 13Concrete sample porosity vertical height distribution.
Calculation results of overall porosity of concrete specimen.
| The Original State | The First Circle | The Second Circle | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Porosity (%) | 0.65 | 1.50 | 2.82 |