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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Materials 2020-11, Vol.13 (22), p.5154 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
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 & 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 |