The DOI matches its Crossref record; 150 of the 150 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advances, limitations and prospects of nondestructive testing and evaluation of thick composites and sandwich structures: A state-of-the-art review
Abstract
Abstract In recent years, composite materials have gained popularity in numerous high-tech and engineering applications, owing to their outstanding physico-mechanical properties. They were initially used as fairings/reinforcements for different structures, but their application has recently shifted from general-purpose structures to primary and secondary load-bearing structures, where structural failures would result in catastrophic safety repercussions. This increased scope of application has prompted the introduction of composite structures featuring significant thickness and complexity. As such, the application of nondestructive testing and evaluation (NDT&E) to localize and characterize flaws in these materials at their incipient initiations could save resources, eliminate unplanned breakdown, and provide a timely window for repair-maintenance activities. Therefore, this paper critically reviews the recent advances in NDT&E as applied to the inspection of thick composite parts and sandwich structures (composites with a thickness ≥15 mm) and determines possible research prospects to address the limitations of the current technologies. A brief overview of defects/damage occurring in composite structures is provided followed by the main NDT&E techniques used to detect these flaws. Since there are many NDT&E techniques available, this work limits its scope on techniques that focus on the detection, localization, and characterization of flaws in thick composites and sandwich structures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Summary Review of Vibration-Based Damage Identification Methods
Doebling, S. W., Farrar, C. R., & Prime, M. B. (1998) · The Shock and Vibration Digest · doi:10.1177/058310249803000201 · Cited by 2,823
Vibration-based Damage Identification Methods: A Review and Comparative Study
Fan, W., & Qiao, P. (2011) · Structural Health Monitoring · doi:10.1177/1475921710365419 · Cited by 2,045
Analysis and Performance of Fiber Composites
Agarwal, B. D., Broutman, L. J., & Bert, C. W. (1981) · Journal of Applied Mechanics · doi:10.1115/1.3157582 · Cited by 1,859
Dally, J. W., Riley, W. F., & Kobayashi, A. S. (1978) · Journal of Applied Mechanics · doi:10.1115/1.3424473 · Cited by 1,219
Ultrasonic arrays for non-destructive evaluation: A review
Drinkwater, B. W., & Wilcox, P. D. (2006) · NDT & E International · doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2006.03.006 · Cited by 1,147
A review of recent research on mechanics of multifunctional composite materials and structures
Gibson, R. F. (2010) · Composite Structures · doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2010.05.003 · Cited by 1,141
Ultrasonic Testing of Materials
Krautkrämer, J., & Krautkrämer, H. (1990) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-10680-8 · Cited by 1,097
Guided wave based structural health monitoring: A review
Mitra, M., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2016) · Smart Materials and Structures · doi:10.1088/0964-1726/25/5/053001 · Cited by 1,045
Glass fiber-reinforced polymer composites – a review
Sathishkumar, T., Satheeshkumar, S., & Naveen, J. (2014) · Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites · doi:10.1177/0731684414530790 · Cited by 991
Analysis and performance of fiber composites
Bailey, J. E. (1981) · Composites · doi:10.1016/0010-4361(81)90413-4 · Cited by 967
Cited by
Structural Health Monitoring in Composite Structures: A Comprehensive Review
Hassani, S., Mousavi, M., & Gandomi, A. H. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22010153 · Cited by 258
Wang, Y., Luo, Q., Xie, H., Li, Q., & Sun, G. (2022) · International Journal of Mechanical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107529 · Cited by 149
Metadata
- Authors
- Nsengiyumva, W., Zhong, S., Lin, J., Zhang, Q., Zhong, J., & Huang, Y.
- Venue
- Composite Structures
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 256
- Pages
- 112951
- ISSN
- 0263-8223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3085140663
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 150
- FWCI
- 18.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.