Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 616–631 | Cite as

Modified Gutenberg–Richter Coefficient for Damage Evaluation in Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Simulations on a Shaking Table

  • Francisco Sagasta
  • Amadeo Benavent-Climent
  • Tomás Fernández-Quirante
  • Antolino Gallego


This paper presents analysis and discussion of the \(b\)- and ib-values calculated from the acoustic emission (AE) signals recorded during dynamic shake-table tests conducted on a reinforced concrete (RC) frame subjected to several uniaxial seismic simulations of increasing intensity until collapse. The intensity of shaking was controlled by the peak acceleration applied to the shake-table in each seismic simulation, and it ranged from 0.08 to 0.47 times the acceleration of gravity. The numerous spurious signals not related to concrete damage that inevitably contaminate AE measurements obtained from complex dynamic shake-table tests were properly filtered with an RMS filter and the use of guard sensors. Comparing the \(b\)- and ib-values calculated through the tests with the actual level of macro-cracking and damage observed during testing, it was concluded that the limit value of 0.05 proposed in previous research to determine the onset of macro-cracks should be revised in the case of earthquake-type dynamic loading. Finally, the \(b\)- and ib-values were compared with the damage endured by the RC frame evaluated both visually and quantitatively in terms of the inter-story drift index.


Acoustic emission Structural health monitoring Reinforced concrete Earthquakes \(b\)-Value 



This research received financial support from the local government of Spain, Consejería de Innovación, Ciencia y Tecnología, Project P07-TEP-02610, from the FPU Program of the Education, Culture and Sports Ministry of Spain, and from the European Union (Fonds Européen de Dévelopment Régional).


  1. 1.
    Yuyama, S., Okamoto, T., Nagataki, S.: Acoustic emission evaluation of structural integrity in repaired reinforced concrete beams. Mater. Eval. 52(1), 86–90 (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yuyama, S., Okamoto, T., Shigeishi, M., Ohtsu, M.: Quantitative evaluation and visualization of cracking process in reinforced concrete by a moment tensor analysis of acoustic emission. Mater. Eval. 53(6), 751–756 (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yuyama, S., Okamoto, T., Shigeishi, M., Ohtsu, M.: Acoustic emission generated in corners of reinforced concrete rigid frame under cyclic loading. Mater. Eval. 53(3), 409–412 (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grosse, C., Ohtsu, M.: Acoustic Emission Testing. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benavent-Climent, A., Castro, E., Gallego, A.: AE monitoring for damage assessment of RC exterior beam-column subassemblages subjected to cycling loading. Struct. Health Monit. 8, 175–189 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benavent-Climent, A., Castro, E., Gallego, A.: Evaluation of low-cycle fatigue damage in RC exterior beam-column subassemblages by acoustic emission. Constr. Build. Mater. 24, 1830–1842 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benavent-Climent, A., Gallego, A., Vico, J.M.: An acoustic emission energy index for damage evaluation of reinforced concrete slabs under seismic loads. Struct. Health Monit. 11(1), 69–81 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gallego, A., Benavent-Climent, A., Infantes, C.: Health monitoring of reinforced concrete slabs subjected to earthquake-type dynamic loading via measurement and analysis of acoustic emissions signals. Smart Struct. Syst. 8(4), 385–398 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aggelis, D.G., Soulioti, D.V., Sapouridis, N., Barkoula, N.M., Paipetis, A.S., Matikas, T.E.: Acoustic emission characterization of the fracture process in fibre reinforced concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 25, 4126–4131 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gutenber, B., Richer, C.F.: Seismicity of the Earth and Associated Phenomena. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1954)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Colombo, S., Main, I.G., Forde, M.C.: Assessing damage of reinforced concrete beam using “\(b\)-value” analysis of acoustic emission signals. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 15(3), 280–286 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Raghu Prasad, B.K., Vidya Sagar, R.: An experimental study on \(b\)-value analysis of AE associated with fracture of RCC. In: NDE 2007, National Seminar on Non-Destructive evaluation, November 28–30, Vadorada (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carpinteri, A., Lacidogna, J., Puzzi, S.: From criticality to final collapse: the evolution of “the \(b\)-value” from 1.5 to 1. Chaos Solitons Fractals 41, 843–853 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vidya, Sagar R., Raghu Prasad, B.K., Shantha, Kumar S.: An experimental study on cracking evolution in concrete and cement mortar by the \(b\)-value analysis of acoustic emission technique. Cem. Concr. Res. 42, 1094–1104 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shiotani, T., Fujii, K., Aoki, T., Amou, K.: Evaluation of progressive failure using AE sources and improved \(b\)-value on slope model test. In: Progress in Acoustic Emission VII. Japan Society NDI, Tokyo, 529–534 (1994) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shiotani, T., Yuyama, S., Li, Z.W., Ohtsu, M.: Application of AE improved b-value to quantitative evaluation of fracture process in concrete materials. J. Acoust. Emiss. 19, 118–132 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shiotani, T., Yuyama, S., Li, Z.W., Ohtsu, M.: Quantitative evaluation of fracture process in concrete by the use of improved b-value. In: 5th International Symposium on Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 293–302 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rao, M.V.M.S., Prasanna-Lakshmi, K.J.: Analysis of b-value and improved b-value of acoustic emissions accompanying rock fracture. Curr. Sci. 89(9), 1577–1582 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Benavent-Climent, A., Morillas, L., Escolano-Margarit, D.: Shake-table tests of a reinforced concrete frame designed following modern codes: seismic performance and damage evaluation. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. (2013). doi: 10.1002/eqe.2372
  20. 20.
    CEN. Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Standard EN 1998–1:2004, Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    MFOM: Norma de Construcción Sismorresistente: parte general y edificación (NCSE-02), Ministerio de Fomento, Boletín Oficial del Estado (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eaton, M., May, M., Featherston, C., Holford, K., Hallet, S., Pullin, R.: Characterisation of damage in composite structures using acoustic emission. J. Phys. 305(1), 012086 (2011). doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/305/1/012086 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aggelis, D.G., Mpalaskas, A.C., Matikas, T.E.: Investigation of different fracture modes in cement-based materials by acoustic emission. Cem. Concr. Res. 48, 1–8 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sagasta, F.A., Torné, J.L., Sánchez, A., Gallego, A.: Discrimination of acoustic emission signals for damage assessment in a reinforced concrete slab subjected to seismic simulations. Arch. Acoust. 38(3), 303–310 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Sagasta
    • 1
  • Amadeo Benavent-Climent
    • 2
  • Tomás Fernández-Quirante
    • 1
  • Antolino Gallego
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied PhysicsUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Structural Mechanics and Industrial ConstructionPolytechnic University of MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations