Advertisement

Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy for Structural Health Monitoring

  • Geoffrey A. SlipherEmail author
  • Robert A. Haynes
  • Jaret C. Riddick
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

Structural heath monitoring (SHM) can provide an estimate of the state of damage in a structure, and of the remaining useful life of that structure. The work presented here is an investigation of a proposed new SHM technique for composite structures composed of carbon-fiber-reinforced-polymers (CFRP). Electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) is employed to estimate the damage state of the composite. No modification to current CFRP processing methods is required, nor is the proposed technique invasive or destructive. EIS interfaces can be either permanently attached or temporarily connected. We hypothesize that EIS has the potential to be more sensitive and selective for damage detection by using a full complex-plane analysis, considering both impedance magnitude and phase angle. This is in contrast to electrical SHM approaches employing resistance measurement, the real component of impedance, which ignores phase angle and reactance information. In order to test our hypothesis we implemented three different experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of the EIS technique: (1) specimen load sensitivity; (2) specimen damage sensitivity; and (3) specimen fatigue sensitivity. Multiple electrical interrogation paths through the specimen are considered.

Keywords

Electrical impedance spectroscopy Structural health monitoring Carbon fiber Fatigue state Damage state detection Load state detection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the expert and valuable assistance of Mr. Wosen Wolde with the design, production, assembly, and trouble shooting of the electronics switching board.

References

  1. 1.
    Chung DDL (2007) Damage detection using self-sensing concepts. Proc IME G J Aero Eng 221(4):509–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu A, Wang KW, Bakis CE (2010) Damage detection of epoxy polymer via carbon nanotube fillers and external circuitry. In: 18th international conference on composites or nano engineering, Anchorage, AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gao L, Thostenson ET, Zhang Z, Chou T-W (2009) Coupled carbon nanotube network and acoustic emission monitoring for sensing of damage development in composites. Carbon 47(5):1381–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thostenson ET, Chou T‐W (2006) Carbon nanotube networks: sensing of distributed strain and damage for life prediction and self healing. Adv Mater 18(21):2837–2841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chung DDL (2012) Carbon materials for structural self-sensing, electromagnetic shielding and thermal interfacing. Carbon 50(9):3342–3353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ayres JW, Lalande F, Chaudhry Z, Rogers CA (1998) Qualitative impedance-based health monitoring of civil infrastructures. Smart Mater Struct 7(5):599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pohl J, Herold S, Mook G, Michel F (2001) Damage detection in smart CFRP composites using impedance spectroscopy. Smart Mater Struct 10(4):834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loyola BR, Briggs TM, Arronche L, Loh KJ, La Saponara V, O’Bryan G, Skinner JL (2013) Detection of spatially distributed damage in fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Struct Health Monitor 12(3):225–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Na S, Tawie R, Lee HK (2011) Impedance-based non-destructive evaluation of the FRP adhesive joints in corrosive environment with re-usable technique. In: SPIE smart structures and materials + nondestructive evaluation and health monitoring. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 79811B–79811BGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhong CH, Croxford AJ, Wilcox PD (2012) Inductively coupled transducer system for damage detection in composites. In: SPIE smart structures and materials + nondestructive evaluation and health monitoring. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 83480H–83480HGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grimberg R, Premel D, Lemistre MB, Balageas DL, Placko D (2001) Compared NDE of damages in graphite/epoxy composites by electromagnetic methods. In: 6th annual international symposium on NDE for health monitoring and diagnostics. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 65–72Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luo X, Chung DDL (1999) Electromagnetic interference shielding using continuous carbon-fiber carbon-matrix and polymer-matrix composites. Comp Part B Eng 30(3):227–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holloway CL, Sabrina Sarto M, Martin J (2005) Analyzing carbon-fiber composite materials with equivalent-layer models. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat 47(4):833–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geoffrey A. Slipher
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert A. Haynes
    • 1
  • Jaret C. Riddick
    • 1
  1. 1.Vehicle Technology DirectorateU.S. Army Research LaboratoryAberdeen Proving GroundUSA

Personalised recommendations