ACOUSTIC EMIS S I ON WELD

MON ITOR FUNCT I ON

device u s e s
• The device uses conventional analog
electronics to acquire and process AE activity.
• That includes the use of analog signal
amplification and band-pass filtering of signals
from standard resonant transducers.
• Consecutive AE events are subjected to the
three-step sequential test or AE pattern
recognition filtering program
 FIELD TESTS WITH THE AEWM
• Field tests were conducted to determine the
suitability of the AEWM for inspecting bridges.
• The first test using the AEWM was on the I-24
twin-arch structure over the Tennessee River
near Paducah. The t e s t was performed by
KTRP and GARD personnel in December 1 98 2
• The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet had previously detected out-
of-plane bending cracks on those structures near the end
connections of floor beams .
• Cracks were present in the vicinity of coped flanges where the floor
beams were framed into the tie chords . That type of cracking is
caused by design
• problems and is som e what generic for tied- arch brid ges . The
cracks were fatigue-related and not due to fabrication defects .
• Several crack sites were located in the end floor beams over the
piers during an inspection performed just prior to the AE
monitoring tests . Cracks were present at the terminal of the upper
flanges usually at the toes of the web-to-flange fillet weld .
• Crack sites chosen for AE testing were located near bolted angle-
splice plates that connected the floor beams to tie-chord girders . It
was assumed those locations would be difficult to monitor because
of the large amounts of fretting noise resulting from the bolted
connections . That assumption was confirmed during the tests .
Typically , over 1000 AE events occurred per hour. All of that
activity was associated with the passage of traffic over the portion
of the bridge being tested.
• Two sensors were mounted in a linear array 64 inches apart along
the edge of the angle splice plate that connected the floor beam to
the tie girder. They were acoustically coupled to the floor-beam
web The upper flange ( which is the side of the crack ) was located
about 1 6 inches below the upper-mounted AE sensor.
• A third sensor was attached as near as practi cal
to the crack. All tests were performed in the
AEWM data-recording mod e . The data were
• stored on floppy disks and taken to the GARD l
aboratory for subsequent replay and analysis .
Field data from one test where the AEWM
detected a flaw were
• replayed several times through an oscilloscope
with the AE sources.
 Result
• Each component of the AEWM three - step model was
inactivated successively. Those replays revealed additional AE
indication running along the bolt line between the active
transducers . Those new indications were false ( i.e .
,background noise) and masked AE activity from the crack .
This shows that the three-step model is valid and necessary to
identify AE indications from cracks in high mechanical noise
environments such as bolted or riveted joints .
• The AEWM test indicated the unit was able to detect fatigue
crack growth successfully on a bridge. That test generated
interest for further evaluation of the AEWM and the AE
phenomenon on bridges .