1887
Volume 17 Number 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Precast concrete elements are commonly employed in the construction industry, however failing to comply with manufacturers’ guidelines and poor construction practice can lead to loss of efficiency compromising the usability of the building. This paper presents two case studies where ground penetrating radar surveys, performed to investigate the cause of failure of precast concrete elements, were supported by the finite difference time domain numerical approach. In the first case, the model was built after the survey for a better understanding of the complex reflection patterns unexpectedly experienced and to provide a clear interpretation; in the second case, the numerical simulation was performed prior to the survey, according to the information already available on the precast unit. The synthetic radargrams were then used as a valuable reference to assess the precast element internal conditions: on site, the comparison of the real radargrams with the synthetic ones allowed to address safely the intrusive works necessary to determine the concrete quality and during the processing step, any deviation from the ideal ground penetrating radar response gave potentially an indication of anomalies in the assembly operations that could be identified. The finite difference time domain method should then be considered as complementary to ground penetrating radar surveys aimed to investigate precast elements.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12037
2019-03-18
2020-01-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AllenE. and IanoJ.2013. Fundamentals of Building Construction: Materials and Method, 6th edn. Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AngelisD., TsourlosP., TsokasG., VargemezisG. and ZacharopoulouG.2017. Accessing a historic wall structure using GPR. The case of Heptapyrgion fortress Thessaloniki, Greece. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR), Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 28–30 June.
  3. BarrileV. and PucinottiR.2005. Application of radar technology to reinforced concrete structures: a case study. NDT&E International38, 596–604.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BaysalE., KosloffD.D. and SherwoodJ.W.C.1984. A two‐way non‐reflecting wave equation. Geophysics49, 132–141.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BerengerJ.P.1994. A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. Journal of Computational Physics114, 185–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. BindaL. and SaisiA.2009. Application of NDTs to the diagnosis of historic structures. Proceedings of the 7th International symposium on NDT in civil engineering (NDTCE 2009), Nantes, France, 30 June to 3 July.
  7. BindaL., ZanziL., LualdiM. and CondoleoP.2005. The use of georadar to assess damage to a masonry Bell Tower in Cremona, Italy. NDT&E International38, 171–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. BourdiT., RhaziJ.E., BooneF. and BallivyG.2012. Modelling dielectric constant values of concrete: an aid to shielding effectiveness prediction and ground penetrating radar wave technique interpretation. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics45, 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. CarcioneJ.M., FeliciangeliL.P. and ZamparoM.2002. The exploding reflection concept for ground penetrating radar modelling. Annals of Geophysics45, 473–478.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. De DomenicoD., CampoD. and TeramoA.2013. FDTD modelling in high‐resolution 2D and 3D GPR surveys on a reinforced concrete column in a double wall of hollow bricks. Near Surface Geophysics11, 29–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. De DomenicoD., TeramoA. and CampoD.2013. GPR surveys for the characterization of foundation plinths within a seismic vulnerability analysis. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering10, 034007.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. DiamantiN. and GiannopoulosA.2009. Implementation of ADI‐FDTD subgrids in ground penetrating radar FDTD models. Journal of Applied Geophysics67, 309–317.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ElliottK.S.2016. Precast Concrete Structures, 2nd edn. CRC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. GiannakisI. and GiannopolousA.2015. Time‐synchronized convolutional perfectly matched layer for improved absorbing performance in FDTD. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters14, 690–693.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. GiannakisI., GiannopoulosA. and WarrenC.2018. Realistic FDTD GPR antenna models optimized using a novel linear/nonlinear full‐waveform inversion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing99, 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. GiannakisI., GiannopoulosA. and WarrenC.2019. A machine learning based fast forward solver for ground penetrating radar with application to full waveform inversion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing99, 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. GlassJ.2000. The Future for Precast Concrete in Low‐Rise Housing. British Precast Concrete Federation, Leicester.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. GorgolewskiM.2005. The potential for prefabrications in UK housing to improve sustainability. In: Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (eds J.Yang, P.S.Brandon and A.C.Sidwell), 121–128. Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. HartleyJ., GiannopoulosA. and WarrenC.2018. A Huygens subgridding approach for efficient modelling of ground penetrating radar using the finite‐difference time‐domain method. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), Rapperswil, Switzerland, 18–21 June.
  20. JamilM., HassanM.K., Al‐MattarnehH.M.A. and ZainM.F.M.2013. Concrete dielectric properties investigation using microwave non‐destructive techniques. Materials and Structures46, 77–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. JolM.H.2009. Ground Penetrating Radar: Theory and Applications. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. KlyszG., BalayssacJ.P. and FerriresX.2008. Evaluation of dielectric properties of concrete by a numerical FDTD model of a GPR coupled antenna parametric study. NDT&E International41, 621–631.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. KunzK.S. and LuebbersR.J.1993. The Finite Difference Time Domain Method for Electromagnetics. CRC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LachowiczJ. and RuckaM.2017. A concept of heterogenous numerical model of concrete for GPR simulations. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR), Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 28–30 June.
  25. LiuT., KlotzscheA., PondkuleM., VerreckenH., Van der KrukJ. and SuY.2017. Estimation of the subsurface cylindrical object properties from GPR Full Waveform Inversion. Proceeding of the 9th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR), Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 28–30 June.
  26. MayrhoferC., BrinkA., RolligM. and WiggenhauserH.2003. Detection of shallow voids in concrete structures with impulse thermography and radar. NDT&E International36, 257–263.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. NewmannJ. and ChooB.S.2003. Advanced Concrete Technology. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. OgunsolaA., ReggianiU. and SandoliniL.2005. Shielding effectiveness of concrete buildings. IEEE 6th International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility and Electromagnetic Ecology, St. Petersburg, 65–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. PadaratzI.J.1996. A numerical and experimental investigation of radar coupling and propagation through concrete. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.
  30. Pérez‐GraciaV., CasellesO.J., ClapésJ. and Santos‐AssunçaoS.2017. GPR building inspection: examples of building structures assessed with ground penetrating radar. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR), Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 28–30 June.
  31. Pérez‐GraciaV., GarciaF.G. and AbadI.R.2008. GPR evaluation for the damage found in the reinforced concrete base of a block of flats: a case study. NDT&E International41, 341–353.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. RadzeviciusS.J. and DanielsJ.J.2000. Ground penetrating radar polarization and scattering from cylinders. Journal of Applied Geophysics45, 111–125.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. RobertA.1998. Dielectric permittivity of concrete between 50 MHz and 1 GHz and GPR measurements for building material evaluation. Journal of Applied Geophysics40, 89–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. RodenJ. and GedneyS.2000. Convolution PML (CPML): an efficient FDTD implementation of the CFS–PML for arbitrarily media. Microwave and Optical Technology Letters27, 334–339.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SandmeierK.J.2016. Reflex Software Version 8.2, User's Manual.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. ShaariA., MillardS.G. and BungeyJ.H.2004. Modelling the propagation of a radar signal through concrete as low‐pass filter. NDT&E International37, 327–242.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. SollaM., LorenzoH., NovoA. and RiveiroB.2011. Evaluation of ancient structures by GPR (ground penetrating radar): the arch bridges of Galicia (Spain). Scientific Research and Essays6, 1877–1884.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. SoutsosM.N., BungeyJ.H., MillardS.G., ShawM.R. and PattersonA.2001. Dielectric properties of concrete and their influence on radar testing. NDT&E International34, 419–425.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. TafloveA. and HagnessS.C.2000. Computational Electrodynamics, the Finite Difference Time‐Domain Method, 2nd edn. Artech House, Norwood, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. TomekR.2017. Advantages of precast concrete in highway infrastructure construction. Procedia Engineering196, 176–180.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. TsuiF. and MatthewsS.L.1997. Analytical modelling of the dielectric properties of concrete for subsurface radar applications. Construction and Building Materials11, 149–161.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. WarrenC., GiannopoulosA. and GiannakisI.2016. gprMax: open source software to simulate electromagnetic waves propagation for ground penetrating radar. Computer Physics Communication209, 163–170.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. WarszawskiA., AvrahamM. and CarmelD.1984. Utilization of precast concrete elements in buildings. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management110, 476–485.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. WayA.G.J., CosgroveT.C. and BrettleM.E.2007. Precast Concrete Floors in Steel Framed Buildings. The Steel Construction Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. WeiX., DiamantiN., ZhangX., AnnanP. and D. SarrisC.2017. Spatially filtered FDTD subgridding for ground penetrating radar numerical modelling. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR), Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 28–30 June.
  46. YeeK.S.1966. Numerical solution of initial boundary value problems involving Maxwell's equations in isotropic media. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation14, 302–307.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. YeeA.A.2001a. Social and environmental benefits of precast concrete technology. PCI Journal46, 14–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. YeeA.A.2001b. Structural and economic benefits of precast pre‐stressed concrete construction. PCI Journal, 46, 34–42.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12037
Loading
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12037
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) , Ground Penetrating Radar and precast unit
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error