Comparison of methods for estimating Young's moduli of mortar specimens.

Compression test Computed tomography Inverse problem Simulation Ultrasound Young’s modulus

Journal

Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 09 04 2024
accepted: 17 06 2024
medline: 21 6 2024
pubmed: 21 6 2024
entrez: 20 6 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Precisely estimating material parameters for cement-based materials is crucial for assessing the structural integrity of buildings. Both destructive (e.g., compression test) and non-destructive methods (e.g., ultrasound, computed tomography) are used to estimate Young's modulus. Since ultrasound estimates the dynamic Young's modulus, a formula is required to adapt it to the static modulus. For this formulas from the literature are compared. The investigated specimens are cylindrical mortar specimens with four different sand-to-cement mass fractions of 20%, 35%, 50%, and 65%. The ultrasound signals are analyzed in two distinct ways: manual onset picking and full-waveform inversion. Full-waveform inversion involves comparing the measured signal with a simulated one and iteratively adjusting the ultrasound velocities in a numerical model until the measured signal closely matches the simulated one. Using computed tomography measurements, Young's moduli are semi-analytically determined based on sand distribution in cement images. The reconstructed volume is segmented into sand, cement, and pores. Young's moduli, as determined by compression tests, were better represented by full-waveform inversions (best RMSE = 0.34 GPa) than by manual onset picking (best RMSE = 0.87 GPa). Moreover, material parameters from full-waveform inversion showed less deviation than those manually picked. The maximal standard deviation of a Young's modulus determined with FWI was 0.36, while that determined with manual picking was 1.11. Young's moduli from computed tomography scans match those from compression tests the closest, with an RMSE of 0.13 GPa.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-65149-3 PMID: 38902434
pubmed: 38902434
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-65149-3
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-65149-3
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

14198

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Jurowski, K. & Grzeszczyk, S. Influence of selected factors on the relationship between the dynamic elastic modulus and compressive strength of concrete. Materials 11, 477. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11040477 (2018).
doi: 10.3390/ma11040477 pubmed: 29565830 pmcid: 5951323
Kessler, S., Thiel, C., Grosse, C. U. & Gehlen, C. Effect of freeze-thaw damage on chloride ingress into concrete. Mater. Struct. 50, 121. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-016-0984-4 (2017).
doi: 10.1617/s11527-016-0984-4
Marques, A. I. et al. Modulus of elasticity of mortars: Static and dynamic analyses. Constr. Build. Mater. 232, 117216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117216 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117216
Makoond, N., Cabané, A., Pelà, L. & Molins, C. Relationship between the static and dynamic elastic modulus of brick masonry constituents. Constr. Build. Mater. 259, 120386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120386 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120386
Nalon, G. H. et al. Compressive strength, dynamic, and static modulus of cement-lime laying mortars obtained from samples of various geometries. J. Build. Eng. 44, 102626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102626 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102626
Neville, A. M. Properties of Concrete (Pearson Education Limited, 2011).
Bastgen, K. J. & Hermann, V. Experience made in determining the static modulus of elasticity of concrete. Mater. Struct. 10, 357–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02473733 (1977).
doi: 10.1007/BF02473733
Philleo, R. E. Comparison of results of three methods for determining Young’s modulus of elasticity of concrete. ACI J. Proc. 51, 461–470. https://doi.org/10.14359/11690 (1955).
doi: 10.14359/11690
Zhang, Y., Gu, Y., Zhou, H. & Yang, L. Extracting static elastic moduli of rock through elastic wave velocities. Acta Geophys. 72, 915–931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-023-01139-9 (2024).
doi: 10.1007/s11600-023-01139-9
Mulargia, F. & Ciccotti, M. Differences between static and dynamic elastic moduli of a typical seismogenic rock. Geophys. J. Int. 157, 474–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02213.x (2004).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02213.x
Chen, A. & Schumacher, T. Estimation of in-situ stresses in concrete members using polarized ultrasonic shear waves. AIP Conf. Proc. 1581, 903–908. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4864917 (2004).
doi: 10.1063/1.4864917
Popovics, J. S. Verification of relationships between mechanical properties of concrete-like materials. Mater. Struct. 8, 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02475168 (1975).
doi: 10.1007/BF02475168
Popovics, J. S. A study of static and dynamic modulus of elasticity of concrete. ACI-CRC Final Report. https://www.acifoundation.org/Portals/12/Files/PDFs/CRC_43.pdf (2008).
Lydon, F. & Balendran, R. Some observations on elastic properties of plain concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 16, 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(86)90106-7 (1986).
doi: 10.1016/0008-8846(86)90106-7
Saenger, E. H. et al. Analysis of high-resolution X-ray computed tomography images of Bentheim sandstone under elevated confining pressures. Geophys. Pros. 64, 12400. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12400 (2016).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.12400
Andrä, H. et al. Digital rock physics benchmarks-part II: Computing effective properties. Comput. Geosci. 50, 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2012.09.008 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2012.09.008
Schmid, S. et al. Estimating Young’s moduli based on ultrasound and full-waveform inversion. Ultrasonics 136, 107165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2023.107165 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2023.107165 pubmed: 37797446
Landis, E. N., Hassefras, E., Oesch, T. S. & Niederleithinger, E. Relating ultrasonic signals to concrete microstructure using X-ray computed tomography. Constr. Build. Mater. 268, 121124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121124 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121124
DIN EN 12390-1, Prüfung von Festbeton - Teil 1: Form, Maße und andere Anforderungen für Probekörper und Formen; Deutsche Fassung. Deutsches Institut für Normen (2021).
DIN EN 12390-2, Prüfung von Festbeton - Teil 2: Herstellung und Lagerung von Probekörpern für Festigkeitsprüfungen (2021).
DIN EN 196-1, Prüfverfahren für Zement - Teil 1: Bestimmung der Festigkeit; Deutsche Fassung. Deutsches Institut für Normen (2016).
Klebba, J. Uncertainty Propagation Functions. MATLAB Central File Exchange. https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/89812-uncertainty-propagation-functions
DIN EN 12390-13, Prüfung von Festbeton - Teil 13: Bestimmung des Elastizitätsmoduls unter Druckbelastung (Sekantenmodul). Deutsches Institut für Normen (2021).
Krautkramer, J. & Krautkramer, H. Ultrasonic Testing of Materials (Springer, 1990).
Boxberg, M. S., Duda, M., Löer, K., Friederich, W. & Renner, J. Determining P- and S-wave velocities and Q-values from single ultrasound transmission measurements performed on cylindrical rock samples: it’s possible, when..., 22nd EGU General Assembly, online. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-9178 (2020).
Fichtner, A. Full Seismic Waveform Modelling and Inversion (Springer, 2011).
Boehm, C. et al. Using optimal transport to mitigate cycle-skipping in ultrasound computed tomography. Med. Imaging Ultrason. Imaging Tomogr. 12038, 1203809. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2605894 (2022).
doi: 10.1117/12.2605894
Powell, M. J. D. An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of several variables without calculating derivatives. Comput. J. 7, 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/7.2.155 (1964).
doi: 10.1093/comjnl/7.2.155
Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T. & Flannery, B. P. Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing (Cambridge University Press, 2007).
Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in python. Nat. Methods 17, 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 pubmed: 32015543 pmcid: 7056644
Afanasiev, M. et al. A. Modular and flexible spectral-element waveform modelling in two and three dimensions. Geophys. J. Int. 216, 1675–1692. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy469 (2019).
doi: 10.1093/gji/ggy469
Feldkamp, L., Davis, L. & Kress, J. Practical cone-beam algorithm. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A. https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.1.000612 (1984).
doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.1.000612
Karel, J. Z. Contrast Limited Adaptive Histograph Equalization. In Graphic Gems IV, Academic Press Professional 474–485 (1994).
Zeiler, M. D. ADADELTA: An Adaptive Learning Rate Method. CoRR. arXiv:1212.5701 (2012).
Timothy, J. J. Analytical and computational models for the effective properties of disordered microcracked porous materials. Doctoral dissertation, Ruhr-Universität Bochum. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29883.82727 (2017).
Benveniste, Y. A new approach to the application of Mori–Tanaka’s theory in composite materials. Mech. Mater. 6, 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6636(87)90005-6 (1987).
doi: 10.1016/0167-6636(87)90005-6
Wu, X., Yan, Q., Hedayat, A. & Wang, X. The influence law of concrete aggregate particle size on acoustic emission wave attenuation. Sci. Rep. 11, 22685. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02234-x (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-02234-x pubmed: 34811470 pmcid: 8608817

Auteurs

Simon Schmid (S)

Department of Materials Engineering, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Technical University of Munich, Franz-Langinger-Str. 10, Munich, 81245, Bavaria, Germany. sim.schmid@tum.de.

Jithender J Timothy (JJ)

Department of Materials Engineering, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Technical University of Munich, Franz-Langinger-Str. 10, Munich, 81245, Bavaria, Germany.

Elena Woydich (E)

Department of Materials Engineering, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Technical University of Munich, Franz-Langinger-Str. 10, Munich, 81245, Bavaria, Germany.

Jochen Kollofrath (J)

Department of Materials Engineering, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Technical University of Munich, Franz-Langinger-Str. 10, Munich, 81245, Bavaria, Germany.

Christian U Grosse (CU)

Department of Materials Engineering, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Technical University of Munich, Franz-Langinger-Str. 10, Munich, 81245, Bavaria, Germany.

Classifications MeSH