apt student power point presentation

8/3/2019 APT Student Power Point Presentation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/apt-student-power-point-presentation 1/22

Air Coupled Impact Echo Analysis

of Historic Brick Masonry

Nicole Trujillo, Undergraduate Student

The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USADepartment of Architectural Engineering

Faculty Advisor—Thomas Boothby, PhD, PE, RA

APT College of Fellows Mentor—Michael Lynch, PE, AIA, FAPT



October 15, 2011 Air Coupled Impact Echo Analysis of Historic Brick Masonry Nicole Trujillo

Description of IE Method

Impact-Echo (Sansalone and Strett) The impact echo (IE) method is a non-destructive testing (NDT) method.

Material

P wave Speed (m/s)

[Sansalone and

Strett4]

Brick 3400-4050

Lime Mortar 1200-2400

Some common P wave speeds for various materials

f=0.96Cp/2t

Spring Ball and Accelerometer




Application of Air-Coupled

IE Method

Custom microphone enclosure assembly

Air Coupled Impact Echo Zhu and Popovics (2002)




Application of Air-Coupled

IE Method

Data acquisition and control hardware




Bonding Types

There are 5 classifications according to A. Sadri, NDT&E Int'l 36 (2003).

1. Very Good Bonding

(VPB)

2. Fair Bonding Voids(FBV)

3. Poor Bonding

Honeycombing

(PBH)

4. Very poor bonding

(VPB)

5. Weak Signal (WS)



October 15, 2011 Air Coupled Impact Echo Analysis of Historic Brick Masonry

Field Testing: Beverley Minster




The air-coupled impact-echo method is applied to the three layer brick webbing

of rib vaults in the 13th-century Beverley Minster.

Beverley Minster




Beverley Minster

Testing




Beverley Minster

Thickness Frequency

The calculated 2100 m/s wave velocity gives a thickness frequency of 2500 Hz.

Material

P wave

Speed (m/s)

[Sansalone

and Strett4]

P wave Speed

(m/s)

Brick 3400-4050 2100

Lime Mortar 1200-2400 1200

f=0.96Cp/2t




Beverley Minster

Results

Tests ConductedJune 2010

VGB (Very Good Bonding)

FBV (Fair Bonding Voids)

PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)

VPB (Very Poor Bonding)

WS (Weak Signal)




Beverley Minster

Results

Vault 8 End with Equipment

Tests ConductedJune 2010



PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)


WS (Weak Signal)




Beverley Minster

ResultsVault 2 South (17-Point Plot)

Tests ConductedAugust 2011



PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)


WS (Weak Signal)






PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)


WS (Weak Signal)

Beverley Minster

Results

Tests ConductedAugust 2011

Vault 8 South (65-Point Plot)




Beverley Minster

Conclusions

•North vaults show more signs of very good bonding.

•South vaults show signs of poor bonding and

honeycombing.

•Overall, there was significant de-bonding at the end

of the vaults, as expected.




Field Testing: Wyoming Seminary

Area 1

Swetland, Fleck, and Darte Halls

Campus of Wyoming Seminary in Kingston, PA.




Wyoming Seminary

Conclusions

• As expected most of the test locations

indicated very good bonding or fair

bonding.

• Yet no specific trend was found to explain

the areas of poor bonding.






PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)


Masonry Preservation Services

Wall Specimen ABond Disruption

Partially Filled Joints






PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)



Wall Specimen B

Unfilled Collar Joints

Cored Brick





Wall Specimen C

Control

Embedded Steel Beam Terra Cotta

Stucco



PBH (Poor Bonding-

Honeycombing)





Conclusions

• Air-coupled IE is a viable system.

• Progress toward a more automated

system and software.• Successful in indicating bonding types in

various field tests.




Acknowledgements

• National Center for Preservation

Technology and Training (NCPTT)

• Masonry Preservation Services

•Structures Lab, Department of Architectural Engineering, Penn State

University



THANK YOU!

QUESTIONS?

apt student power point presentation

Documents