Evaluation of modulus of elasticity of date palm sandwich panels using ultrasonic wave velocity and experimental models
•Nondestructive evaluation of date palm sandwich panel by Sylvatest Duo was approved.•Development of experimental models for prediction of MOEd in complex structures.•Prediction of MOEd for heterogeneous structures was achieved with reliable assessment.•Significant effect of transducer position on u...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Measurement : journal of the International Measurement Confederation 2020-01, Vol.149, p.107016, Article 107016 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •Nondestructive evaluation of date palm sandwich panel by Sylvatest Duo was approved.•Development of experimental models for prediction of MOEd in complex structures.•Prediction of MOEd for heterogeneous structures was achieved with reliable assessment.•Significant effect of transducer position on ultrasonic wave velocity was approved.
In this research, the dynamic modulus of elasticity for two different types of heterogeneous sandwich panels, namely, blockboard and battenboard, was nondestructively evaluated by a simple ultrasonic device and some experimental models developed for homogeneous materials and solid wood. For this purpose, ultrasonic wave velocity through blockboard and battenboard made by date palm wood was measured in different transducer positions using Sylvatest Duo device and the suitability of five experimental models was examined for the prediction of dynamic modulus of elasticity of the sandwich panels. Results showed that the behavior of the multilayered sandwich structure can be evaluated with reliable assessment using Sylvatest Duo device along with the experimental models developed for solid wood and homogenous structures. The most accurate results were gained by the modification factors obtained by Eqs. (2) and (3) with 0.14 ± 3.0% and 0.002 ± 3.0% relative error values, respectively. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0263-2241 1873-412X |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107016 |