Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yin, Duohao, Xu, Qianjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7698055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33207652
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13225154
_version_ 1783615741600202752
author Yin, Duohao
Xu, Qianjun
author_facet Yin, Duohao
Xu, Qianjun
author_sort Yin, Duohao
collection PubMed
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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7698055
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76980552020-11-29 Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing Yin, Duohao Xu, Qianjun Materials (Basel) Article 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. MDPI 2020-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7698055/ /pubmed/33207652 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13225154 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Yin, Duohao
Xu, Qianjun
Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title_full Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title_fullStr Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title_short Comparison of Sandstone Damage Measurements Based on Non-Destructive Testing
title_sort comparison of sandstone damage measurements based on non-destructive testing
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7698055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33207652
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13225154
work_keys_str_mv AT yinduohao comparisonofsandstonedamagemeasurementsbasedonnondestructivetesting
AT xuqianjun comparisonofsandstonedamagemeasurementsbasedonnondestructivetesting