This study mainly aims to investigate the applicability of the combination of air-coupled surface-wave and computer-vision techniques to the evaluation of self-healing in in situ concrete members. Small-scale beam specimens were made from ordinary concrete and concretes with solid- and liquid-type capsules; the capsules were employed as self-healing agents. To monitor the crack healing progress, surface-wave tests using an air-coupled transducer and contact receivers were conducted on each specimen in uncracked, cracked, and healed conditions after 7, 14, 28, and 63 days of water immersion. Additionally, a computer-vision technique involving image binarization and registration was applied to measure high-resolution crack information. The specimens containing the micro-capsules showed superior healing performance compared to the ordinary concrete specimens. After 63 days of self-healing, the spectral energy transmission ratio increased up to about 80% of the uncracked, while the crack area decreased up to about 94% of the fully cracked. The healing rate was estimated using the change in spectral energy transmission ratio strongly correlated with that estimated using the change in crack area.
MehtaPKMonteiroPJMEbraryI. Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
2.
BreugelKV. Is there a market for self-healing cement-based materials. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Self-Healing Materials. Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 18–20 April 2007, 2007.
3.
De RooijMVan TittelboomKDe BelieN, et al.Self-healing Phenomena in Cement-Based Materials: State-Of-The-Art Report of RILEM Technical Committee 221-SHC. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2013.
4.
MihashiHNishiwakiT. Development of engineered self-healing and self-repairing concrete-state-of-the-art report. J Adv Concr Technol2012; 10(5): 170–184.
5.
FerreraLVan MullemTAlonsonMC, et al.Experimental characterization of the self-healing capacity of cement based materials and its effects on the material performance: A state of the art report by COST action SARCOS WG2. Constr Build Mater2018; 167: 115–142.
6.
SisomphonKCopurogluOKoendersEAB. Self-healing of surface cracks in mortars with expansive additive and crystalline additive. Cem Concr Compos2012; 34(4): 566–574.
7.
AzarsaPGuptaRBiparvaA. Assessment of self-healing and durability parameters of concretes incorporating crystalline admixtures and Portland limestone. Cem Concr Compos2019; 99: 17–31.
8.
LeeHXDWongHSBuenfeldNR. Self-sealing of cracks in concrete using superabsorbent polymers. Cem Concr Res2016; 79: 194–208.
9.
LefeverGSnoeckDDe BelieN, et al.The contribution of elastic wave NDT to the characterization of modern cementitious media. Sensors2020; 20(10): 2959.
10.
TittelboomKVWangJAraújoM, et al.Comparison of different approaches for self-healing concrete in a large-scale lab test. Constr Build Mater2016; 107: 125–137.
11.
TittelboomKVBelieNDLooDV, et al.Self-healing efficiency of cementitious materials containing tubular capsules filled with healing agent. Cem Concr Compos2011; 33(4): 497–505.
12.
OhS-RChoiYWKimYJ. Effect of cement powder based self-healing solid capsule on the quality of mortar. Constr Build Mater2019; 214: 574–580.
13.
ChoiYWOhS-RKimCG, et al.The experimental study on preparation characteristics of self-healing microcapsules for mixing cement composites utilizing liquid inorganic materials. J Rec Const Resour2018; 6(4): 236–244.
14.
LiWJiangZYangZ. Acoustic characterization of damage and healing of microencapsulation-based self-healing cement matrices. Cem Concr Compos2017; 84: 48–61.
15.
ZuoJLiHZhanJ, et al.Preparation and properties of cement mortar/metal hydroxide microcapsules composites. Cem Concr Compos2020; 105: 103438.
16.
KanLLShiHSSakulichAR, et al.Self-healing characterization of engineered cementitious composite materials. ACI Mater J2010; 107(6): 617–624.
17.
TittelboomKVBelieNDMuynckWD, et al.Use of bacteria to repair cracks in concrete. Cem Concr Res2010; 40: 157–166.
18.
WiktorVJonkersHM. Quantification of crack-healing in novel bacteria-based self-healing concrete. Cem Concr Compos2011; 33(7): 763–770.
19.
KuaHWGuptaSAdayAN, et al.Biochar-immobilized bacteria and superabsorbent polymers enable self-healing of fiber-reinforced concrete after multiple damage cycles. Cem Concr Compos2019; 100: 35–52.
20.
ParkBChoiYC. Self-healing capability of cementitious materials with crystalline admixtures and super absorbent polymers (SAPs). Constr Build Mater2018; 189: 1054–1066.
21.
MehdipourIZoughiRKhayatKH. Feasibility of using near-field microwave reflectometry for monitoring autogenous crack healing in cementitious materials. Cem Concr Compos2018; 85: 161–173.
22.
AldeaCMSongWJPopovicsJS, et al.Extent of healing of cracked normal strength concrete. J Mater Civ Eng2000; 12(1): 92–96.
23.
GwonSAhnEShinM. Self-healing of modified sulfur composites with calcium sulfoaluminate cement and superabsorbent polymer. Compos B Eng2019; 162: 469–483.
24.
HollandRBKimJY, et al.Monitoring and evaluation of self-healing in concrete using diffuse ultrasound. NDT E Int2013; 57: 36–44.
25.
HilloulinBLeglandJBLysE, et al.Monitoring of autogenous crack healing in cementitious materials by the nonlinear modulation of ultrasonic coda waves, 3D microscopy and X-ray microtomography. Constr Build Mater2016; 123: 143–152.
26.
LiuSBundurZBZhuJ, et al.Evaluation of self-healing of internal cracks in biomimetic mortar using coda wave interferometry. Cem Concr Res2016; 83: 70–78.
27.
KimGKimJYKurtisKE, et al.Drying shrinkage in concrete assessed by nonlinear ultrasound. Cem Concr Res2017; 92: 16–20.
28.
KimGKimJTKurtisKE, et al.Quantitative evaluation of carbonation in concrete using nonlinear ultrasound. Mater Struct2016; 49(1–2): 399–409.
29.
AhnEKimHSimS-H, et al.Principles and applications of ultrasonic-based nondestructive methods for self-healing in cementitious materials. Materials2017; 10(3): 278.
30.
AhnEShinMPopovicsJS, et al.Effectiveness of diffuse ultrasound for evaluation of micro-cracking damage in concrete. Cem Concr Res2019; 124: 105862.
31.
PopovicsJSSongWJGhandehariM, et al.Application of surface wave transmission measurements for crack depth determination in concrete. ACI Mater J2000; 97(2): 127–135.
32.
ShinSWZhuJMinJ, et al.Crack depth estimation in concrete using energy transmission of surface waves. ACI Mater J2008; 105(5): 510–516.
33.
AhnEKimHSimS-H, et al.Surface-wave based model for estimation of discontinuity depth in concrete. Sensors2018; 18(9): 2793.
34.
KeeSHZhuJ. Using air-coupled sensors to determine the depth of a surface-breaking crack in concrete. J Acoust Soc Am2010; 127(3): 1279–1287.
35.
SchemppFKimJY, et al.A fully non-contact, air-coupled ultrasonic measurement of surface breaking cracks in concrete. J Nondestruct Eval2015; 34(1): 272.
36.
KeeSHZhuJ. Effects of sensor locations on air-coupled surface wave transmission measurements across a surface-breaking crack. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control2011; 58(2): 427–436.
37.
AggelisDGShiotaniT. Repair evaluation of concrete cracks using surface and through-transmission wave measurements. Cem Concr Compos2007; 29(9): 700–711.
38.
RoseJL. Ultrasonic Guided Waves in Solid Media. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
39.
KeeSHZhuJ. Surface wave transmission across a partially closed surface-breaking crack in concrete. ACI Mater J2014; 111(1): 35–46.
40.
SongHParkJPopovicsJS. Development of an MEMS ultrasonic microphone array system and its application to compressed wavefield imaging of concrete. Smart Mater Struct2020; 29: 105011.
41.
HamSSongHOelzeML, et al.A contactless ultrasonic surface wave approach to characterize distributed cracking damage in concrete. Ultrasonics2017; 75: 46–57.
42.
HamSPopovicsJS. Application of contactless ultrasound toward automated inspection of concrete structures. Autom Constr2015; 58: 155–164.
43.
ChoiHPopovicsJS. NDE application of ultrasonic tomography to a full-scale concrete structure. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control2015; 62(6): 1076–1085.
44.
DokunODJacobsLJHaj-AliRM. Ultrasonic monitoring of material degradation in FRP composites. J Eng Mech2000; 126(7): 704–710.
45.
BayHEssATuytelaarsT, et al.Speeded-up robust features (SURF). Comput Vis Image Underst2008; 110(3): 346–359.
46.
FischlerMABollesRC. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun ACM1981; 24(6): 381–395.
KimHAhnEChoS, et al.Comparative analysis of image binarization methods for crack identification in concrete structures. Cem Concr Res2017; 99: 53–61.
49.
KimHLeeJAhnE, et al.Concrete crack identification using a UAV incorporating hybrid image processing. Sensors2017; 17(9): 2052.
50.
ChaY-JChoiWSuhG, et al.Autonomous structural visual inspection using region based d(b) Crack-mouth displacement measurementseep learning for detecting multiple damage types. Comput‐Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng2018; 33(9): 731–747.
51.
KimHAhnEShinM, et al.Crack and noncrack classification from concrete surface images using machine learning. Struct Health Monit2019; 8(3): 725–738.
52.
ZhangXRajanDStoryB. Concrete crack detection using context‐aware deep semantic segmentation network. Comput‐Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng2019; 34(11): 951–971.
