Next Article in Journal
Erratum: Yoshimi, Y., et al. Size of Heparin-Imprinted Nanoparticles Reflects the Matched Interactions with the Target Molecule. Sensors 2019, 19, 2415
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Fabric Properties on Textile Pressure Sensors Performance
Previous Article in Journal
Toward the Required Detection Limits for Volatile Organic Constituents in Marine Environments with Infrared Evanescent Field Chemical Sensors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Facile Chemical Bath Synthesis of SnS Nanosheets and Their Ethanol Sensing Properties
Open AccessArticle

Comparative Performance of Four Electrodes for Measuring the Electromechanical Response of Self-Damage Detecting Concrete under Tensile Load

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Sejong University, 209, Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05006, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2019, 19(17), 3645; https://doi.org/10.3390/s19173645
Received: 23 July 2019 / Revised: 17 August 2019 / Accepted: 19 August 2019 / Published: 21 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smart Structures and Materials for Sensor Applications)
Self-damage or/and stress-sensing concrete is a promising area of research for measuring the electromechanical response of structural materials using more robust sensors. However, the copper and silver paste sensors widely used in such applications can be expensive and have detrimental effects on the load carrying capacity and durability of the structural systems upon which they are installed. Accordingly, this study compared the performance of four electrode types—conventional copper tape with silver paste (CS), copper film with type 1 carbon tape (CC1), copper film with type 2 carbon tape (CC2), and copper wire and film with type 2 carbon tape (WC2)—to develop an economical and practical electrode for measuring the electromechanical response of self-damage-detecting concrete. The CC1 electrode exhibited comparable performance to the CS electrode in measuring the electromechanical response of self-damage-detecting concrete, despite requiring a longer polarization time (80 s) than the CS electrode (25 s). The CS electrode exhibited a higher damage-sensing capacity (GF2), whereas the CC1 electrode exhibited a higher strain-sensing capacity (GF1), as well as good damage-sensing capacity. Therefore, the CC1 electrode using copper film with type 1 carbon tape was determined to be the best alternative to the conventional CS electrode. View Full-Text
Keywords: self-sensing; attached electrode; self-damage detecting concrete; copper material; carbon material self-sensing; attached electrode; self-damage detecting concrete; copper material; carbon material
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Noh, H.W.; Kim, M.K.; Kim, D.J. Comparative Performance of Four Electrodes for Measuring the Electromechanical Response of Self-Damage Detecting Concrete under Tensile Load. Sensors 2019, 19, 3645.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop