Cited by 55Smart Materials for ConstructionUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationStructural Health Monitoring Techniques

Failure prediction in self-sensing nanocomposites via genetic algorithm-enabled piezoresistive inversion

Hassan, Hashim, Tallman, Tyler N·2020·Structural Health Monitoring

Abstract

Conductive nanocomposites have been explored extensively for structural health monitoring (SHM) due to their self-sensing nature via the piezoresistive effect. Combined with a non-invasive conductivity imaging modality such as electrical impedance tomography (EIT), piezoresistivity is a powerful tool for SHM. To date, however, the combination of the piezoresistive effect and EIT has been limited to just damage detection. From a SHM perspective, it may be more beneficial to pre-emptively predict failure before it occurs. To that end, we propose a novel methodology for failure prediction in nanocomposites using piezoresistive inversion. Our approach makes use of a genetic algorithm (GA) to determine the mechanical state of the structure using conductivity changes observed via EIT. First, a rectangular nanocomposite specimen with a central hole is manufactured. Second, the specimen is loaded in tension to induce stress concentrations near the hole. Third, EIT is used to image the resulting stress concentration-induced conductivity changes near the hole. Fourth, GA-enabled piezoresistive inversion is implemented to determine the underlying displacements from the observed conductivity changes. The strains are then determined from kinematic relations and the stresses from constitutive relations. Lastly, a failure criterion is used to predict failure. By validating our results with finite element analysis and digital image correlation, we demonstrate that the proposed approach can accurately predict the onset of failure and therefore enable unprecedented SHM capabilities in piezoresistive nanocomposites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1475921719863062

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hassan, H., & Tallman, T. N.
Affiliations
Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Hassan, Hashim
Venue
Structural Health Monitoring
Published
2019-07-16
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
765-780
ISSN
  • 1475-9217 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3168
OpenAlex
W2957316572
Cited by
55
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Structural Health Monitoring (publishedVersion)
Funders
Purdue University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Smart Materials for Construction
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Health Monitoring Techniques
Keywords
failure prediction, conductive nanocomposites, electrical impedance tomography, genetic algorithm, stress concentration, displacement estimation, failure criteria, digital image correlation

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