Download pdf
Comparative analysis of ultrasonic testing and ground penetrating radar (GPR) for concrete structure evaluation
- 1 University of Macau
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Nondestructive testing of concrete structures plays a vital role in ensuring its safety and service life. In this paper, two common nondestructive testing techniques for concrete structures, ultrasonic testing and ground penetrating radar testing, are compared and analyzed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness, limitations, and applicability of these two methods for detecting common defects in concrete, such as cracks and corrosion of rebar. But both ultrasonic detection and ground-based radar have their own advantages and limitations. In some cases, the two methods can be combined to provide complementary advantages and improve the accuracy of the assessment.
Keywords
non-destructive evaluation, ultrasonic testing, ground penetrating radar, concrete structures, comparative analysis
[1]. Sprayberry, R. E. (1989). Basics of ultrasonic testing (No. DP-MS-89-49; CONF-890334-1; CONF-890482-2). Savannah River Site (SRS), Aiken, SC (United States). Savannah River National Lab.(SRNL).
[2]. KrautkramerJ, K. H. (1990). Ultrasonic testing of materials.
[3]. Daniels, J. J. (2000). Ground penetrating radar fundamentals. Prepared as an appendix to a Report to the US EPA, Region V, 1-21.
[4]. Maierhofer, C. (2003). Nondestructive evaluation of concrete infrastructure with ground penetrating radar. Journal of materials in civil engineering, 15(3), 287-297.
[5]. Jia, Y., Wen, J., Zhao, B., & Yang, C. (2023). Concrete Structure Ultrasonic Testing Technology Research Latest Progress and Development Trend. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 372, p. 02020). EDP Sciences.
[6]. Trinks, I., Hinterleitner, A., Neubauer, W., Nau, E., Löcker, K., Wallner, M., ... & Seren, S. (2018). Large‐area high‐resolution ground‐penetrating radar measurements for archaeological prospection. Archaeological Prospection, 25(3), 171-195.
[7]. Zhang, L., Ling, T., Yu, B., Huang, F., & Zhang, S. (2021). Intensive interferences processing for GPR signal based on the wavelet transform and FK filtering. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 186, 104273.
[8]. Hijazi, A. (2011). Introduction to non-destructive testing techniques.
[9]. Janků, M., Cikrle, P., Grošek, J., Anton, O., & Stryk, J. (2019). Comparison of infrared thermography, ground-penetrating radar and ultrasonic pulse echo for detecting delaminations in concrete bridges. Construction and Building Materials, 225, 1098-1111.
[10]. Olhoeft, G. R. (1984). Applications and limitations of ground penetrating radar. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 1984 (pp. 147-148). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
[11]. Moyer, M. W. (1975). Ultrasonic inspection for lack of penetration and porosity in a tungsten inert gas weld with a step geometry (No. Y-1983). Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Tenn.(USA).
[12]. Hammarström, E. (2018). Non-destructive testing of concrete with ground penetrating radar.
[13]. Smith, D. G., & Jol, H. M. (1995). Ground penetrating radar: antenna frequencies and maximum probable depths of penetration in Quaternary sediments. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 33(1-3), 93-100.
[14]. Marianeschi, E., & Tili, T. (1983). A Note on the Smallest Defect that can be Detected using Ultrasonics. NDT international, 16(2), 75-77.
[15]. Long, R. (2000). Improvement of ultrasonic apparatus for the routine inspection of concrete (Doctoral dissertation, University of London).
[16]. Hugenschmidt, J. (2002). Concrete bridge inspection with a mobile GPR system. Construction and building materials, 16(3), 147-154.
Cite this article
Lin,L. (2023). Comparative analysis of ultrasonic testing and ground penetrating radar (GPR) for concrete structure evaluation. Applied and Computational Engineering,26,271-274.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Functional Materials and Civil Engineering
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).