Loading…

Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing

Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an important means to detect and assess rock damage. To better understand the accuracy of NDT methods for measuring damage in sandstone, this study compared three NDT methods, including ultrasonic testing, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) testing, com...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Materials 2020-11, Vol.13 (22), p.5154
Main Authors: Yin, Duohao, Xu, Qianjun
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43
container_end_page
container_issue 22
container_start_page 5154
container_title Materials
container_volume 13
creator Yin, Duohao
Xu, Qianjun
description Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an important means to detect and assess rock damage. To better understand the accuracy of NDT methods for measuring damage in sandstone, this study compared three NDT methods, including ultrasonic testing, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) testing, computed tomography (CT) scan testing, and a destructive test method, elastic modulus testing. Sandstone specimens were subjected to different levels of damage through cyclic loading and different damage variables derived from five different measured parameters—longitudinal wave (P-wave) velocity, first wave amplitude attenuation, resistivity, effective bearing area and the elastic modulus—were compared. The results show that the NDT methods all reflect the damage levels for sandstone accurately. The damage variable derived from the P-wave velocity is more consistent with the other damage variables, and the amplitude attenuation is more sensitive to damage. The damage variable derived from the effective bearing area is smaller than that derived from the other NDT measurement parameters. Resistivity provides a more stable measure of damage, and damage derived from the acoustic parameters is less stable. By developing P-wave velocity-to-resistivity models based on theoretical and empirical relationships, it was found that differences between these two damage parameters can be explained by differences between the mechanisms through which they respond to porosity, since the resistivity reflect pore structure, while the P-wave velocity reflects the extent of the continuous medium within the sandstone.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/ma13225154
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7698055</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2462409502</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU9LHEEQxRtRdNl4yScYyCUIo_2_py8B3TUa2OhBPTe1PbWbWXa61-6ZBb99OlESk4KiHtSPxyuKkI-Mngth6UUPTHCumJIHZMKs1TWzUh6-0yfkNOcNLSUEa7g9JidCcGq04hOymMV-B6nLMVRxVT1AaPMQA1Zz6GGN1XeEPCbsMQy5uoKMbVXIuxjqOeYhjX7o9lg9Ft2F9QdytIJtxtO3OSVPX68fZ7f14v7m2-xyUXvRiKFeatFY6b0winHfojVcaGixpWi4Mg0D441ZgpZeglp5sBa8psa3TGiGUkzJl1ff3bjssfUlXIKt26Wuh_TiInTu303ofrh13DujbUOVKgaf3wxSfB5LeNd32eN2CwHjmB2XmktqFeUF_fQfuoljCuW835ShqnShzl4pn2LOCVd_wjDqfv3J_f2T-Am1y4Oh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2462705270</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Yin, Duohao ; Xu, Qianjun</creator><creatorcontrib>Yin, Duohao ; Xu, Qianjun</creatorcontrib><description>Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an important means to detect and assess rock damage. To better understand the accuracy of NDT methods for measuring damage in sandstone, this study compared three NDT methods, including ultrasonic testing, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) testing, computed tomography (CT) scan testing, and a destructive test method, elastic modulus testing. Sandstone specimens were subjected to different levels of damage through cyclic loading and different damage variables derived from five different measured parameters—longitudinal wave (P-wave) velocity, first wave amplitude attenuation, resistivity, effective bearing area and the elastic modulus—were compared. The results show that the NDT methods all reflect the damage levels for sandstone accurately. The damage variable derived from the P-wave velocity is more consistent with the other damage variables, and the amplitude attenuation is more sensitive to damage. The damage variable derived from the effective bearing area is smaller than that derived from the other NDT measurement parameters. Resistivity provides a more stable measure of damage, and damage derived from the acoustic parameters is less stable. By developing P-wave velocity-to-resistivity models based on theoretical and empirical relationships, it was found that differences between these two damage parameters can be explained by differences between the mechanisms through which they respond to porosity, since the resistivity reflect pore structure, while the P-wave velocity reflects the extent of the continuous medium within the sandstone.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1996-1944</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1996-1944</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ma13225154</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33207652</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Acoustic properties ; Acoustics ; Amplitudes ; Computed tomography ; Cyclic loads ; Damage assessment ; Damage detection ; Destructive testing ; Electrical impedance ; Electrical resistivity ; Longitudinal waves ; Measurement methods ; Measurement techniques ; Medical imaging ; Modulus of elasticity ; Nondestructive testing ; P waves ; Parameters ; Permeability ; Porosity ; Sandstone ; Spectrum analysis ; Ultrasonic imaging ; Ultrasonic testing ; Variables ; Velocity ; Wave attenuation ; Wave velocity</subject><ispartof>Materials, 2020-11, Vol.13 (22), p.5154</ispartof><rights>2020. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2020 by the authors. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2462705270/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2462705270?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yin, Duohao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Qianjun</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing</title><title>Materials</title><description>Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an important means to detect and assess rock damage. To better understand the accuracy of NDT methods for measuring damage in sandstone, this study compared three NDT methods, including ultrasonic testing, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) testing, computed tomography (CT) scan testing, and a destructive test method, elastic modulus testing. Sandstone specimens were subjected to different levels of damage through cyclic loading and different damage variables derived from five different measured parameters—longitudinal wave (P-wave) velocity, first wave amplitude attenuation, resistivity, effective bearing area and the elastic modulus—were compared. The results show that the NDT methods all reflect the damage levels for sandstone accurately. The damage variable derived from the P-wave velocity is more consistent with the other damage variables, and the amplitude attenuation is more sensitive to damage. The damage variable derived from the effective bearing area is smaller than that derived from the other NDT measurement parameters. Resistivity provides a more stable measure of damage, and damage derived from the acoustic parameters is less stable. By developing P-wave velocity-to-resistivity models based on theoretical and empirical relationships, it was found that differences between these two damage parameters can be explained by differences between the mechanisms through which they respond to porosity, since the resistivity reflect pore structure, while the P-wave velocity reflects the extent of the continuous medium within the sandstone.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Acoustic properties</subject><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Amplitudes</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Cyclic loads</subject><subject>Damage assessment</subject><subject>Damage detection</subject><subject>Destructive testing</subject><subject>Electrical impedance</subject><subject>Electrical resistivity</subject><subject>Longitudinal waves</subject><subject>Measurement methods</subject><subject>Measurement techniques</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Modulus of elasticity</subject><subject>Nondestructive testing</subject><subject>P waves</subject><subject>Parameters</subject><subject>Permeability</subject><subject>Porosity</subject><subject>Sandstone</subject><subject>Spectrum analysis</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasonic testing</subject><subject>Variables</subject><subject>Velocity</subject><subject>Wave attenuation</subject><subject>Wave velocity</subject><issn>1996-1944</issn><issn>1996-1944</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkU9LHEEQxRtRdNl4yScYyCUIo_2_py8B3TUa2OhBPTe1PbWbWXa61-6ZBb99OlESk4KiHtSPxyuKkI-Mngth6UUPTHCumJIHZMKs1TWzUh6-0yfkNOcNLSUEa7g9JidCcGq04hOymMV-B6nLMVRxVT1AaPMQA1Zz6GGN1XeEPCbsMQy5uoKMbVXIuxjqOeYhjX7o9lg9Ft2F9QdytIJtxtO3OSVPX68fZ7f14v7m2-xyUXvRiKFeatFY6b0winHfojVcaGixpWi4Mg0D441ZgpZeglp5sBa8psa3TGiGUkzJl1ff3bjssfUlXIKt26Wuh_TiInTu303ofrh13DujbUOVKgaf3wxSfB5LeNd32eN2CwHjmB2XmktqFeUF_fQfuoljCuW835ShqnShzl4pn2LOCVd_wjDqfv3J_f2T-Am1y4Oh</recordid><startdate>20201116</startdate><enddate>20201116</enddate><creator>Yin, Duohao</creator><creator>Xu, Qianjun</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201116</creationdate><title>Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing</title><author>Yin, Duohao ; Xu, Qianjun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Acoustic properties</topic><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Amplitudes</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Cyclic loads</topic><topic>Damage assessment</topic><topic>Damage detection</topic><topic>Destructive testing</topic><topic>Electrical impedance</topic><topic>Electrical resistivity</topic><topic>Longitudinal waves</topic><topic>Measurement methods</topic><topic>Measurement techniques</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Modulus of elasticity</topic><topic>Nondestructive testing</topic><topic>P waves</topic><topic>Parameters</topic><topic>Permeability</topic><topic>Porosity</topic><topic>Sandstone</topic><topic>Spectrum analysis</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasonic testing</topic><topic>Variables</topic><topic>Velocity</topic><topic>Wave attenuation</topic><topic>Wave velocity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yin, Duohao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Qianjun</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Materials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yin, Duohao</au><au>Xu, Qianjun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing</atitle><jtitle>Materials</jtitle><date>2020-11-16</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>22</issue><spage>5154</spage><pages>5154-</pages><issn>1996-1944</issn><eissn>1996-1944</eissn><abstract>Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an important means to detect and assess rock damage. To better understand the accuracy of NDT methods for measuring damage in sandstone, this study compared three NDT methods, including ultrasonic testing, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) testing, computed tomography (CT) scan testing, and a destructive test method, elastic modulus testing. Sandstone specimens were subjected to different levels of damage through cyclic loading and different damage variables derived from five different measured parameters—longitudinal wave (P-wave) velocity, first wave amplitude attenuation, resistivity, effective bearing area and the elastic modulus—were compared. The results show that the NDT methods all reflect the damage levels for sandstone accurately. The damage variable derived from the P-wave velocity is more consistent with the other damage variables, and the amplitude attenuation is more sensitive to damage. The damage variable derived from the effective bearing area is smaller than that derived from the other NDT measurement parameters. Resistivity provides a more stable measure of damage, and damage derived from the acoustic parameters is less stable. By developing P-wave velocity-to-resistivity models based on theoretical and empirical relationships, it was found that differences between these two damage parameters can be explained by differences between the mechanisms through which they respond to porosity, since the resistivity reflect pore structure, while the P-wave velocity reflects the extent of the continuous medium within the sandstone.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>33207652</pmid><doi>10.3390/ma13225154</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1996-1944
ispartof Materials, 2020-11, Vol.13 (22), p.5154
issn 1996-1944
1996-1944
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7698055
source Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Accuracy
Acoustic properties
Acoustics
Amplitudes
Computed tomography
Cyclic loads
Damage assessment
Damage detection
Destructive testing
Electrical impedance
Electrical resistivity
Longitudinal waves
Measurement methods
Measurement techniques
Medical imaging
Modulus of elasticity
Nondestructive testing
P waves
Parameters
Permeability
Porosity
Sandstone
Spectrum analysis
Ultrasonic imaging
Ultrasonic testing
Variables
Velocity
Wave attenuation
Wave velocity
title Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T20%3A31%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Sandstone%20Damage%20Measurements%20Based%20on%20Non-Destructive%20Testing&rft.jtitle=Materials&rft.au=Yin,%20Duohao&rft.date=2020-11-16&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=22&rft.spage=5154&rft.pages=5154-&rft.issn=1996-1944&rft.eissn=1996-1944&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ma13225154&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2462409502%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c383t-b63894cc37512cde97236aded0e725781a7c77ba64c4a5fca99ac607cd1361e43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2462705270&rft_id=info:pmid/33207652&rfr_iscdi=true