Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Review

Ultrasonic detection methods for mechanical characterization and damage

diagnosis of advanced composite materials: A review
Hongjuan Yang a, Lei Yang a, Zhengyan Yang b, *, Yinan Shan c, Haosen Gu c, Jitong Ma d,
Xu Zeng a, Tong Tian a, Shuyi Ma e, Zhanjun Wu a, *
a
State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis, Optimization and CAE Software for Industrial Equipment, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
b
College of Transportation Engineering, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China
c
College of Locomotive and Rolling Stock Engineering, Dalian Jiaotong University, Dalian 116028, China
d
College of Information Science and Technology, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China
e
School of Traffic and Electrical Engineering, Dalian University of Science and Technology, Dalian 116052, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Advanced composite materials are prone to various types of damage during - manufacturing and long-time
Ultrasonic inspection service. Ultrasonic detection methods have been widely employed to detect damage because of their high ac­
Composite materials curacy and reliability. This study gives a comprehensive review of the ultrasonic detection methods for damage
Damage categorization
diagnosis and assessment of advanced composite materials. Firstly, the typical damage types and their effects on
Material parameter measurement
Damage assessment criteria
composite materials are introduced. Ultrasonic measurement methods for determining the parameters of com­
posite materials are reviewed to enhance damage detection accuracy. In addition, acoustic models, detection
techniques, and imaging methods based on ultrasonic bulk wave or guided wave detection technologies are
discussed. Further, the damage diagnosis of composite materials, criteria for damage assessment, and analytical
methods for predicting the remaining service life of damaged composite materials are reviewed in detail. Finally,
insights into the application prospects of advanced composite materials, including the acoustic modeling of
different composites, integration of multiple ultrasonic testing technologies, development of fast damage
monitoring systems, establishment of damage diagnosis criteria, and lifespan prediction of damaged composites,
are provided.

1. Introduction
Advanced composite materials are being increasingly used in the
production of aerospace components [1,2], wind turbines [3–6], and
marine equipment [7] owing to their high stiffness-to-weight ratio,
excellent strength and corrosion resistance, low weight, and improved
mechanical properties [8]. Moreover, significant progress has been
made in improving the product efficiency and cost-effectiveness of
advanced composites, as well as in enhancing specific properties, such as
strength and modulus [9]. Composite materials are gradually becoming
alternatives to metallic materials. Advanced composites are widely used
in various applications, including the manufacturing of chemical con­
tainers, pressure vessels, machine spindles, power transmission shafts,
and robot arms [10].
Owing to the complicated curing and drilling processes during
composite manufacturing, damages, such as delamination, fiber frying,
spalling, chipping, and fuzzing, can occur [11]. In addition, during the
service life of aircraft structures, the extent of the damage in the com­
posite structure may gradually increase owing to various environmental
factors, such as load, vibration, and hygrothermal conditions. For
example, delamination damage occurs in the interior of composites
during service, the generation and propagation of which are not visible.
This damage adversely affects the mechanical properties of aircraft
structures. If the occurrence and accumulation of damage cannot be
detected in time, catastrophic failure of aircraft structures may occur,
thus endangering human life. Over the past 30 years, research on the
damage detection of composite materials in specific fields has focused
on crack damage detection [12], determination of bonding quality in
laminated plates [13], large-scale thin- or thick-walled structures [14],
intelligent structures [15], and sandwich structures [16,17].
Damage must be detected during the manufacturing and processing
stages, as well as during the service period, for quality control and safety

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: zyyang1993@dlmu.edu.cn (Z. Yang), wuzhj@dlut.edu.cn (Z. Wu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117554
Received 18 May 2023; Received in revised form 22 August 2023; Accepted 8 September 2023
Available online 10 September 2023
0263-8223/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

performance evaluation of aircraft structures. Numerous researchers

have investigated the internal damage of composite structures using
methods such as X-ray [18–21], optical testing [22–25], magnetic par­
ticles [26], infrared thermography [27–30], and ultrasonic testing
[31–36]. Among these, ultrasonic inspection technology is highly reli­
able for assessing structural safety performance [37,38]. It is advanta­
geous in detecting damage in advanced composite materials owing to its
ability to scan the cross-sectional area of a structure [39]; further, it
utilizes low-cost and portable inspection equipment, and boasts
improved scanning speed and resolution [40].
However, detecting and evaluating the structural integrity of com­
posite materials via ultrasonic inspection is particularly challenging
because of the multilayered structures with anisotropic velocity distri­
butions [41]. The complexity of ultrasonic wave propagation in com­
posites renders difficulty in measuring material parameters and
accurately detecting any damage. Furthermore, damage may occur at
multiple locations in different components of advanced composite ma­
terials, thus leading to complex acoustic wave propagation mechanisms,
which render difficulty in tracking all the damaged parts [42]. Owing to
these complicated characteristics, the difficulty in damage identification
through ultrasonic inspection increases with the level of target execu­
tion, including the (i) qualitative indication of damage occurrence and
type, (ii) accurate location of damage based on precise material mea­
surement parameters, and (iii) structural safety prediction [43].
Various non-destructive testing techniques for composites have been Fig. 1. Framework of the present review.
developed [9,14,16,17,39,40,42,44–53]. Their effectiveness in the life­
cycle of composite products has been proven, with focus on various
composites are introduced. Finally, in Section 7, research on ultrasonic
aspects such as process design and optimization, manufacturing in­
detection methods is presented, followed by the current challenges and
spection, in-service testing, and structural health monitoring. Wang
future research directions.
et al. [9] summarized the benefits, limitations, capabilities, and appli­
cations of non-destructive testing techniques to composite material
2. Typical damage types and causes in composite materials
structures. A combination of several technologies has been proposed to
improve the diagnosis of damaged composite structures and their evo­
Damage in advanced composite materials likely occurs during their
lution during their lifespan [52]. Compared with the mature non-
manufacturing and processing. As shown in Fig. 2, the typical damage
destructive testing technology developed over the past 50 years, Su
types are drilling-induced damage, impact damage, delamination, and
et al. [39] reviewed the ultrasonic-guided Lamb wave method, which
cracks.
has the advantages of a wide detection range and high detection effi­
ciency, and reported significant achievements in engineering practice.
In addition, they indicated the necessity to promote the mature appli­ 2.1. Drilling-induced damage
cation of ultrasonic-guided Lamb waves for cost-effective non-destruc­
tive testing and structural health monitoring technologies. However, a Composite materials are the primary components of aircraft struc­
roadmap for future research has been developed to take advantage of tures. As these composite materials must be assembled using bolts and
artificial intelligence [39,52,54] and big data to develop digital twins in rivets, drilling is a common and essential process. In general, 300,000
the digital era [52]. However, with the emergence of new composites holes are required to be opened for jet aircrafts, and 1.5 to 3 million
and inspection methods, a comprehensive description of the application holes are required for commercial aircrafts [55]. However, the strength
and the latest progress in ultrasonic methods is required for the per­ and reliability of the connections between parts are severely affected by
formance evaluation and damage diagnosis of composites. damage defects caused by drilling. Owing to the heterogeneity, anisot­
Fig. 1 illustrates the novelty of this review in terms of material ropy, and hardness of composite materials, the common damage mor­
parameter measurements and damage detection using ultrasonic phologies caused by drilling include delamination, fiber frying, spalling,
methods. A practical review of mature and emerging ultrasonic in­ chipping, and fuzzing [11]. The assembly tolerance is affected by
spection methods, and their applications in advanced composite mate­ delamination caused by drilling. A high deviation between the tolerance
rials is presented. These methods include the ultrasonic immersion and standard values can lead to the dismissal of numerous aircraft parts
testing method for determining the elastic constant, detection technol­ and potential safety hazards [56].
ogies, and imaging methods for damage diagnosis in composites. In The five principal factors that determine the drilling performance of
addition, standard practices for the measurement and evaluation of ul­ composites are the workpiece, cutting conditions, machine, coolant, and
trasonic detection methods are provided by the American Society for drill [57]. The possibility of damage during drilling is determined by the
Testing and Materials (ASTM) to ensure the structural integrity of angular change in fiber orientation [58]. In addition, the size of the
advanced composite materials, and guide researchers and engineers. damaged area in composite structures depends on the cutting parame­
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, the ters, geometric parameters of the drill [59], and the spindle speed [60].
common types and causes of damage to composites are described. In Several methods have been proposed to evaluate the severity of
Section 3, the measurement and inversion methods of the composite delamination damage caused by drilling. In different spatial dimensions
material parameters that affect the accuracy of damage detection by (1D [61] or 2D [62]), the ratio of the hole size with delamination
ultrasonic testing are discussed. In Sections 4 and 5, the current status of damage to the standard size is the central element of the evaluation
ultrasonic damage diagnosis in composites based on ultrasonic detection factor. Ultrasonic non-destructive testing exhibits a good detection ef­
methods of bulk and guided waves is presented, respectively. In Section fect for drilling-induced delamination damage. However, its ability to
6, the damage assessment methods, criteria, and life predictions of the detect fiber fractures and surface defects remains poor [63]. The

2
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Fig. 2. Typical damage types in composite materials.

characteristics of composite materials, such as their multilayered
structure, anisotropy, and acoustic attenuation strength, enable the
propagation of ultrasonic waves of different frequencies and modes.
Moreover, owing to the gradual attenuation of the acoustic field strength
with increasing propagation distance, the detection rate of the internal
defects of large-thickness composite structures by ultrasonic testing is
significantly reduced, thereby increasing the difficulty in detecting
borehole damage located away from the surface.
2.2. In-service damage
(1) Impact damage
When a composite part is subjected to an external impact load, its
structure is deformed by the impact source in a linear elastic manner

Table 1
Parameters related to the severity of impact damage.
Impactor Impact energy (J) Type and size (mm) of composite plates Example image Reference

Half steel sphere; 5 Composite plates with graphite/epoxy prepregs; 100 × 100 × 2.1
[68]
m = 6.5 kg

15

30

Steel ball; 689.7 Glass fabric GF/epoxy composite shells; length 200
[69]
m = 0.11 kg

Steel ball; 774

m = 0.134 kg

Hemispheric head 7.4 Composite plates with Cytec 977–2 / Tenax HTS cross-ply laminates; 990 × 110 × 2
[70]

Semi-sphere 4 Plain epoxy matrix CFRP; 60 × 60 × 1

[71]

3
H. Yang et al.
owing to its low interlaminar strength. When the applied load reached
the critical value, the slope of the load–displacement curve decreased
rapidly, and the fiber and matrix of the structure exhibited deformation
and a variety of failure modes. All these cases can lead to impact damage
and a decrease in the overall stiffness of the structure. The severity of the
impact damage is related to certain parameters, such as the structure of
the composite materials, the geometry of the impact body, impact ve­
locity and energy, and boundary conditions (Table 1).
Impact damage to the composite structure of an aircraft is caused by
low-speed impact events, such as bird strikes, hail, and runway gravel,
when the aircraft moves on the runway or flies in the air or when tools
fall during transportation and maintenance. Although the resulting
damage cannot often be directly observed, numerous tiny damages may
appear in the interior of the structure. Owing to these damages, which
include fiber fracture, matrix cracking, and delamination [64], the
tensile and compressive properties of the material are significantly
reduced, and the service life of aircraft structures is severely affected.
Such low-speed impact events occur primarily on thin-skinned sandwich
structures such as aircraft spoilers, engine intake fan blades [65], wing
and tail blades [66], and tail rotor blades [67].
Traditional non-destructive testing methods can locate and charac­
terize the size and type of impact damage in composite structures [72].
Nevertheless, they have the following drawbacks [73]. (a) When impact
damage on a bulky composite structure is detected, local scanning,
including point scanning, line scanning, and surface scanning, must be
performed on the measured structure successively, thus leading to
substantial savings in human resources and time costs; (b) these methods
are unable to monitor the damage online in real-time as damage
detection can be performed only during the repair or maintenance
stages, thereby resulting in increased downtime. Ultrasonic-guided
waves can propagate in thin-plate structures, and owing to their wide
detection range, high speed, and high sensitivity, they have been
increasingly used by scholars for damage-detection research [74–76].
For instance, Diamanti et al. [77] used piezoelectric elements as trans­
mitters/receivers to generate/receive A0 mode Lamb waves, thereby
achieving comprehensive detection of low-speed impact damage loca­
tions on composite plates. However, when ultrasonic guided waves are
used to detect impact damage on curved structures, such as those be­
tween an aircraft wing and web, or on stiffened plate structures with
robust mechanical properties, the wave mode propagating with un­
known group velocity cannot be accurately identified owing to the
multimode and dispersion characteristics of the guided waves [78].
Therefore, locating impact damage and estimating its size and shape are
challenging [79,80], particularly for irregular impact damage. In addi­
tion, the accurate extraction of scattered impact damage signals is
affected by the external environment and operating conditions such as
temperature, humidity, and vibration, thus negatively affecting damage
Fig. 3. Probability of delamination damage at a specific position and size of composites [83].
4
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
position and size estimations. Gorgin et al. [81] studied the effects of
environmental parameters on ultrasonic guided-wave propagation.
Boon et al. [82] experimentally demonstrated that the group velocity of
ultrasonic-guided waves decreases with increasing temperature, thus
causing a deviation in the extraction of the arrival time and impacting
damage detection.
(2) Delamination
Interlayer debonding failure in composites called delamination, is
often caused by interlaminar stress exceeding its strength under factors
such as external load and temperature. Propagation of delamination in
composite laminates is the primary form of structural damage. Thus,
research on delamination detection in composites is of great engineering
significance for improving their durability and service life. Owing to the
multilayered structure of the composites, delamination between the
layers can occur quickly, thereby reducing the structural strength.
Numerous studies on the delamination of composite structures used
in aircraft aerofoil structures have been conducted using non-destructive
identification. The position and size of the delamination in the carbon-
fiber composite laminates are shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b), respectively.
Most of the layers were also distributed in deeper positions, particularly
at h/3 and h/2, where h is the laminate thickness. Additionally, the
damage diameters of 38.1 mm and 50 mm were considered as the crit­
ical dimensions of the delamination based on their use, and these di­
mensions were selected for the experimental study [83].
Researchers have experimentally investigated the causes and factors
affecting delamination expansion. Various materials, including Teflon
film [84], paper, flash tape, vacuum bags, and peel plies [85], have been
inserted into composites as artificial defects. The modal frequency and
damping of the laminates with pre-set delamination were relatively
high.
Although the delamination of more than half a wavelength can be
reliably detected using ultrasonic testing, the use of numerical models
and the interaction with delamination for their characterization have
not been extensively researched [86]. In particular, acoustic waves are
reflected by mode conversion during delamination [87], thus increasing
the difficulty in identifying delamination-scattered signals.
(3) Crack
Cracks are the most common type of damage in composite materials.
Cracks are typically small and dispersed within the matrix. The evolu­
tion of such microcracks is accelerated under load, thus leading to fiber
breakage and dislocation of the composites and ultimately to the failure
of the laminate composites, which is associated with potential hazards.
Numerical simulation is a useful method for investigating the frac­
ture mechanism of carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP). Several re­
searchers have employed numerical methods. In particular, the
extended finite-element method (FEM) has received significant atten­
tion. With respect to the mesh independence of cracked structures,
H. Yang et al.
Karihaloo and Xiao [88] explored the advantages of an extended FEM to
avoid mesh redivision. Dolbow and Nadeau [89] also applied an
extended FEM to the fracture analysis of microstructured materials, thus
reducing the need for mesh reconstruction in different areas between the
materials.
2.3. Summary
The failure of composite structures is typically caused by developing
different damage mechanisms in local areas. The damage mode depends
on the loading type and characteristics of the composite structures. Each
type of damage exhibits unique characteristics. Clarifying the causes,
characteristics, and effects of various defects on material properties is of
great significance for improving the accuracy and reliability of com­
posite damage identification.
3. Mechanical characterization of composite materials
The main parameters of advanced composite materials include
elastic constant, acoustic velocity, and density. Because the accuracy of
damage detection is closely related to the accuracy of composite
parameter measurements, the actual composite parameters must be
accurately determined by direct measurement or inversion methods. In
particular, ultrasonic measurement methods for characterizing the me­
chanical properties of anisotropic composite materials are summarized.
3.1. Extensometers and electrical measurements
For example, as an elementary material parameter, the elastic con­
stant is crucial for calculating physical fields such as mechanics and
acoustics [90,91]. The accuracy of the elastic constant determination
depends on the accuracy of the strain measurement tests. Extensometers
and electrical measurements are commonly used to determine the elastic
constants. Extensometers have shortcomings, such as easy slipping,
small samples that are difficult to clamp, weight and clamping force that
may cause additional deformation to the test piece, and difficulty in
testing compression deformation. However, the electrical measurement
method has the disadvantages of strain gauge adhesion, additional patch
stiffness, one-time use, and high cost.
Fig. 4. Forward and inverse problems of mechanics.
5
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
3.2. Ultrasonic measurement
Determining the material parameters of composite materials using
direct measurements may destroy their structures. Therefore, indirect
measurement methods are required to invert the parameters of com­
posite materials. As illustrated in Fig. 4, the material parameters can be
deduced using the constitutive equations, load form, geometry, bound­
ary conditions, and changes in the mechanical parameters.
A large amount of experimental measurement data is required for the
inversion of composite material parameters using parameter inversion
methods. Relying on traditional strain gauges or extensometers for
measurements is unrealistic. With the emergence of measurement
techniques such as digital image correlation techniques [92,93], the grid
method [94], digital speckle pattern interferometry [95], and ultrasonic
immersion tests [96], the reliability of inversion methods has dramati­
cally improved.
Owing to the relationship between the wave velocity and elastic
constant [97–99], the elastic constants of the composites can be deter­
mined by ultrasonic testing, as presented in Table. 2. Accordingly,
transmission, reflection, and back-reflection methods have been suc­
cessfully developed to improve the precision of acoustic velocity mea­
surements [100]. One of the earliest examples is that in 1970, the elastic
constant of fiber-reinforced composite materials was determined using
ultrasonic wave velocity measurements [101].
To obtain the elastic constants from the phase velocity data, a set of
elastic constants is found using the nonlinear least squares optimization
program such that the difference between the Christoffel solution and
experimental data is minimized [102,103]. However, the algorithm
depends on the initial value. In another study, Chu et al. [104] intro­
duced genetic algorithms based on global optimization to reduce the
dependence on initial estimates.
Moreover, a method that does not require cutting the sample to
measure the velocity in different directions was proposed. Two trans­
ducers were placed on one side of the composite material to measure and
derive different elastic constants by calculating the flight time of the
reflected waves with diverse propagation paths [105]. To enhance both
the consistency and testing speed, Wong et al. [106] employed an ul­
trasonic 2D-array transducer to calculate the elastic constants by
extracting the time-of-flight of ultrasonic wave signals.
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Table 2 4.1. Acoustic models

Determination of elastic constants in composites by ultrasonic testing.
Materials Frequency Coupling Key findings Reference (1) Isotropic model
(MHz) medium An acoustic model was constructed and analyzed using the most
Glass fiber 5 No The dispersion Zimmer J. typical CFRP. Generally, in industrial inspection, the CFRP is simplified
composite effect related to E., et al. as an isotropic medium in the thickness direction (Fig. 5(a)). The
longitudinal waves (1970) acoustic velocity, which was measured by a single probe in a vertically
is less severe [101] incident manner, was the constant acoustic velocity of the CFRP.
(approximately 5%
for velocity).
However, obliquely incident acoustic propagation paths inevitably
Unidirectional 5 Water The elastic constant Robert E. S. occur when ultrasonic array detection techniques are used to detect
CFRP plate of composite (1972) multidirectional CFRP stacked in different ply orientations. If the
materials depends [107] detection is based on an isotropic acoustic model, false or missed dam­
on Young’s
age detections can easily occur.
modulus of the
fibers. (2) Homogenization model
Unidirectional 1 No A method that does Minachi A., Owing to the different effects of fiber orientation on the acoustic
graphite/ not require cutting et al. velocity, the acoustic wave was refracted at different angles on each
epoxy the sample to (1994) interface. To this end, a homogeneous anisotropic acoustic model was
composites measure the [105]
velocity, which
established in the x-z plane [111,112]. As depicted in Fig. 5(b), a CFRP
infers the elastic consisting of four layers with different thicknesses and acoustic prop­
constant from the erties is replaced by a single homogeneous anisotropic material, keeping
time of arrival of incident point A and exit point B of the incident plane wave at the same
the inclined
position on both surfaces. Consequently, the acoustic velocity of each
reflected ultrasonic
signal. layer can be replaced by a single angle-dependent group velocity. When
Unidirectional 5 Water The type of Castellano the homogenization model is used, the velocity distributions at any
CFRP plate anisotropy and A., et al. point in the material component are identical. Nevertheless, because the
modulus of (2014) effects of ultrasonic reflection and refraction at the layer interface are
elasticity can be [96]
ignored, this method cannot describe the deflection characteristics of
determined from
the measurement of the ultrasonic wave propagation path when passing through the layer
the velocity of the interface, and the resulting structural noise can reduce the positioning
ultrasonic wave accuracy.
propagating in the
(3) Anisotropic heterogeneous model
appropriate
direction. Anisotropic heterogeneous acoustic models were established by
Unidirectional 5 No A method for in- Wong V., considering the effects of anisotropy and the multilayered structure of
CFRP plate situ non- et al. the CFRP (Fig. 5(c)). Ultrasonic propagation in unidirectional CFRP
destructive (2022) laminates follows the propagation characteristics of anisotropic elastic
characterization of [106]
waves. Christoffel equation [113], which is used to characterize the
the elastic
properties of distribution of the phase and group velocities, can be derived from the
carbon fiber cloth elastic wave equation. By solving the Christoffel equation, three solu­
using a 2D tions corresponding to quasi-longitudinal waves (qP waves), quasi-shear
ultrasonic array
vertical waves (qSV waves), and quasi-shear horizontal waves (qSH
transducer is
proposed.
waves) were obtained for the phase velocity. The phase and group ve­
locities in anisotropic media differ in propagation direction and
magnitude from those in isotropic media. The acoustic velocity of the
3.3. Summary vertical propagation is consistent when the qP wave propagates in each
layer in different laying directions. Hence, the vertical propagation di­
Several comprehensive reviews have been conducted on ultrasonic rection exhibited no interlayer reflections or refractions. By contrast,
methods for determining the elastic constants of composite materials structural noise with multiple reflections and refractions is generated in
[108–110]. As presented in Table 2, most researchers have adopted a directions that deviate from the vertical direction.
transducer with a center frequency of 5 MHz to minimize the errors
caused by the emitted acoustic field diffraction. Owing to the recycla­ 4.2. Damage detection technology
bility and properties of the composite materials, the measurement of
their elastic constants, critical angles, phase shifts, and group velocities, (1) Phased array technology
as well as the robustness of the inversion parameter algorithm, are Phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) is an ultrasonic imaging
considered necessary for future research. detection technology that implements functions such as ultrasonic beam
movement, deflection, and focusing by applying different time delay
4. Damage detection based on bulk waves rules, that is, the focal law, to different units of the transducer array
when emitting or receiving acoustic waves. Compared with traditional
Ultrasonic bulk waves, that is, waves treated as acting in an infinite ultrasonic detection, PAUT has numerous advantages, including a
medium, were employed to detect damage to composite materials in the higher detection speed, higher sensitivity, and increased flexibility
thickness direction. These methods include pulse reflection and pene­ [114]. Owing to the multilayered structure and anisotropy of composite
tration. Based on the acoustic model (Fig. 5), an image of the damage to materials, the propagation paths of ultrasonic waves emitted by phased
the composite material was generated using imaging algorithms that arrays in composite materials after interaction with different types of
processed the data obtained by ultrasonic testing. damage are complex (see Fig. 6).
For the inspection of non-planar and complex surfaces, the French
Atomic Energy Commission developed a focusing adaptive ultrasonic
tomography system that achieved more flexible and adaptive detection

6
H. Yang et al.
Fig. 5. Acoustic models for CFRP composites based on bulk wave detection: (a) Isotropic, (b) homogenization, and (c) anisotropic heterogeneous models.
Fig. 6. Snapshots of ultrasonic wave emitted by phased array propagation in composite materials.
[115]. They also successfully developed a curved-surface transducer
with a radius of curvature of 15 mm [116]. To inspect large-area aero­
space composite components, Freemantle et al. [117] installed a phased
array in rubber wheels to effectively detect delamination and wrinkles in
aerospace composite components. Research on the application of phased
arrays for damage detection in composite materials is summarized in
Table 3. Owing to the complexity of wave propagation in composite
materials, phased-array detection with delayed transmission, in which
all the elements are fired to form a beam with a fixed focus, is rarely
utilized.
For the detection of defects parallel to the surface, such as delami­
nation in thinner composite materials, the beam deflection character­
istics of PAUT based on bulk waves are not applicable. Additionally, the
superiority of the focusing properties is not evident. Therefore, more
advanced PAUT systems are required for inspecting complex non-planar
composites with thin structures.
7
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
(2) C-scan detection technology
As illustrated in Fig. 7, in the C-scan technology, an ultrasound probe
performs a 2D scanning motion on the object surface. The scanning
signal data are obtained in 3D space, which is determined by the scan­
ning plane and scanning depth. In these 3D data, the signal amplitude is
represented by a grey scale map at any specified scanning depth, thus
resulting in a 2D grey scale image corresponding to each point within
the scanning plane. Large-area impact damage imaging of CFRP can be
accurately performed using C-scan detection technology (Fig. 7) [135].
Additionally, the traditional ultrasonic C-scan method requires signal
peak tracking and complex gate settings. To avoid these problems, an
improvement based on signal correlation was adopted to achieve auto­
mated detection of delamination in CFRP [136]. Ultrasonic C-scanning
is convenient for detecting various types of damage in composites with
thin structures, provides high-precision in-situ images [137], and has
proven its reliability [138].
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Table 3
Parameters of linear transducer array to detect various damages in composites.
Element pitch (mm) Number of elements Frequency (MHz) Damage type Damage size (mm) Delayed transmission Reference

1 64 5 Delamination Length: 4.84 No [118]

0.63 64 5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [119]
0.6 32 5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [120]
1 32 5 Wrinkles Amplitude: No [121]
0.3
0.5 20 2.5 Side drilled hole Diameter: 1.5 No [122]
0.6/0.5 48 2/5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 2 No [123]
0.31 32 10 Impact damage — No [124]
— 16 1.5 Artificially drilled holes Diameter: 0.8/1/1.2 No [125]
— 64 2.25 Circular defects Diameter: 5/10/15/25 No [126]
— 64 5 Artificial defects — No [127]
1 32 5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [128]
1 32 5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [129]
— 64 5 Artificial inclusions Rectangular shape: 10 × 10/10 × 20; No [130]
Circular shape: diameters–10/20
0.3 64 10 Wrinkles — No [131]
0.6/0.5 64 2.25/5 Arc-SDH/ Line-SDH/ — No [132]
Delamination
1 16 5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [133]
1/0.6 64/16 2.25/5 Side drilled holes Diameter: 1.5 No [134]

detection principle of the air-coupled detection technology is shown in

Fig. 7. Damage detection in the composite laminates based on the C-
scan technology.
(3) Air-coupled ultrasonic detection technology
The C-scan and PAUT technologies must be coupled with water,
glycerol, or bonded to the structural surface to achieve ultrasonic in­
spection of CFRP laminates. However, the requirements for the safety
performance of products in the aerospace field are extremely high, and
liquid coupling agents may penetrate composite materials and deterio­
rate their mechanical properties and dimensional stability. The
Fig. 8. Detection principle of the air-coupled detection technology.
Fig. 8. The difficulties of air-coupled ultrasonic detection technology
based on bulk waves for damage detection in CFRP laminates are as
follows. 1) Ultrasonic waves decay quickly in the air; 2) reflection waves
with a large amplitude are generated at the interface between air and
composites, thus resulting in low energy entering the composites [139];
3) because the CFRP laminate has a multilayered structure, the received
ultrasonic wave contains high structural noise, which weakens the
damage signal. Imielińska et al. [31] employed an air-coupled ultrasonic
transducer combined with C-scan technology to detect the impact
damage in CFRP laminates, and evaluated the defect size after the
impact response. Reportedly, the results of this detection method were
in good agreement with the radiographic testing results.
(4) Laser ultrasonic detection technology
Laser ultrasonic detection is also a non-contact ultrasonic detection
technology. Laser ultrasonic detection technology has the advantages of
long-distance usability, non-contact nature, high-resolution, large-scale
detection, and large excitation ultrasonic frequency bandwidth. There­
fore, the laser ultrasonic testing technology has excellent development
potential for the inspection of composite structures. The Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company has independently developed a laser ul­
trasonic testing system. This system can detect defects in composite
structures with a thickness of 44 mm. It has been proven to be able to
detect damage in composite materials of advanced military aircraft
[140]. As reported by Vandenrijt et al. [141], the combination of laser
ultrasonic technology and a mechanical arm enables damage detection
in CFRP workpieces with large curvatures and complex surface struc­
tures. Zeng et al. [142] developed an air-coupled laser ultrasonic testing
system for inspecting woven CFRP by combining laser and air-coupled
technologies. They analyzed the effect of the surface-woven structure
on laser ultrasonic signals; reportedly, the detection of shallow and deep
defects in CFRP laminates was realized with higher contrast and lower
detection rates compared with phased array detection technology.
Nevertheless, laser ultrasound is associated with several problems
when testing composite materials, including low energy conversion ef­
ficiency, weak laser ultrasonic signals, and the potential for material
ablation caused by the increased laser energy.
(5) Comparison
Tiny damage in the thickness direction can be detected using bulk
wave detection technology. Research has reported the successful
detection of damage in CFRP samples with thicknesses ranging from 3 to
6.4 mm. At a detection frequency of 20 MHz, the minimum detected
damage diameter was approximately 0.5 mm. Based on bulk waves
combined with C-scan, PAUT, air-coupled, laser ultrasonic, and other

8
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

detection technologies, smaller damages to the CFRP laminate can be
detected (Table 4). However, their detection efficiencies require further
improvement.
4.3. Imaging methods
(1) Total focus imaging method
The total focusing method (TFM) [151] processes the collected full
matrix data and performs a virtual focus imaging display for each point
in the space to be detected. The diagnostic TFM imaging process for
composite material damage based on PAUT is shown in Fig. 9. It pri­
marily includes characteristic analysis, data acquisition, acoustic
tracing, and imaging.
According to the principle of the TFM, the main factor affecting the
imaging effects depends on the accurate calculation of the acoustic time.
Currently, the acoustic time calculation of CFRP laminates is based on
the three acoustic models discussed in Section 4.1, and the TFM imaging
results of the side-drilled holes are listed in Table 5. The TFM imaging
results based on the isotropic acoustic model are imprecise, and defects
can easily be missed. Nonetheless, because the ultrasonic detection
wavelength is larger than the thickness of the composite material layers,
it conforms to homogenization theory [152–154]. Based on this, Yan
[155] and Li et al. [119] conducted imaging tests on three side-drilled
holes with different depths in composite material using the TFM;
reportedly, the imaging effect was better than that of the isotropic
models. However, note that the imaging signal-to-noise ratio is rela­
tively low owing to the effect of structural noise caused by layer
reflection [156].
When the positions of the acoustic emission source and target point
are known, the acoustic propagation path and acoustic time between
them are inverted. This is consistent with the search for the shortest path
algorithm in the computer field; thus, several scholars have employed
the Dijkstra and A* algorithms [156] to inspect anisotropic materials,
such as austenitic weld seams and CFRP. The Dijkstra algorithm [157]
can solve the shortest path problem by finding the shortest path from
one vertex to all other vertices in a weighted graph. A heuristic function,
which is used to conduct ray tracing based on the Dijkstra algorithm,
was added to the A* algorithm [158] to improve search efficiency. These
algorithms have been adopted to solve path-planning problems and are
suitable for finding paths along given nodes. For example, Zhou et al.
[159] proposed an efficient ultrasonic ray-tracing algorithm for array
imaging by combining the Dijkstra algorithm and Snell’s law. Lin et al.
[133] proposed a ray tracing method based on the Dijkstra algorithm to
obtain more explicit TFM images of side-drilled holes in CFRP laminates
under different coupling conditions. In addition, the Dijkstra algorithm
has been applied to the damage diagnosis of composite material corner
structures [120] and concrete [160–162].
Total focus imaging has been extensively applied for inspecting flat
panels made of CFRP. However, further research on defect imaging in
composite materials with complex structures is required. In addition, the
current TFM does not consider changes in acoustic attenuation. If the
energy changes are considered, the acoustic propagation path can be
optimized and the attenuated energy can be compensated, thus further
improving the effectiveness of the TFM.
(2) 3D visual imaging
Ultrasonic image visualization involves 2D images, such as B-scan
and C-scan displays, as well as TFM imaging results. To present infor­
mation on the size, location, and shape of the damage in composite
materials more stereoscopically, 3D visual imaging technology can be
adopted. Compared with traditional 2D imaging technology, the main
advantages of 3D imaging include [163] improved damage detection
accuracy, reduced risk of false and missed detections, precise charac­
terization of the damage volume, and a wide detection range and high
imaging efficiency. Consequently, 3D visual imaging technology has
broad market application prospects and is currently extensively
researched in industrial non-destructive testing. The reconstruction of
3D ultrasonic images relies primarily on data collected using two
acquisition methods [163]. The first method is based on data collected
using a 1D linear phased array probe with a position encoder. The sec­
ond method is based on the data collected using a 2D rectangular array
of phased arrays.
Owing to their low cost, 1D linear array transducers are widely used
for reconstructing 3D ultrasonic images of composite materials. Never­
theless, owing to structural noise, the defect size characterized by 3D
visualization is not sufficiently precise. To address this problem,
Mohammadkhani et al. [164] proposed an intelligent threshold tech­
nology based on wavelet transform, which extracts the statistical mean
and standard deviation of structural noise, thus realizing more accurate
3D damage imaging. In addition, to achieve fast and real-time 3D im­
aging of damage, Bulavinov et al. [165] utilized a phased array based on
synthetic aperture technology to acquire B-scan images, which were
subsequently synthesized into 3D images. Based on the data collected by
the 1D array probe, 3D visual imaging of the impact damage and pore
defects in composite materials can also be realized.
Another study used a 2D planar array to emit focused beams on an
object to be measured for volume scanning, thereby achieving a 3D vi­
sual characterization of the damage. The main advantages of 3D image
reconstruction based on planar array probes are their high scanning
speed and spatial resolution [166].

Table 4
4.4. Summary
Comparison of damage detection techniques based on the bulk wave for
composites.
This section introduces the ultrasonic detection technology based on
Detection Element Available Characteristics Application
bulk waves for damage detection in composite materials. The charac­
Technology distribution style
intensity teristics of the commonly used acoustic modeling methods, detection
technologies, and imaging methods are summarized and compared.
C-Scan Dense Contact High detection Hole [138];
efficiency. delamination Detection technology based on ultrasonic bulk waves can be used to
[143]; impact diagnose small damages such as delamination, cracks, and wrinkles in
damage [144] composite materials; however, the efficiency of online detection must be
Phased Dense Contact High detection Delamination further improved.
Array accuracy and [145]; wrinkles
sensitivity. [121]; impact
damage [146] 5. Damage detection based on the guided waves
Air-coupled Sparse Contactless No coupling Delamination
media. [147]; impact Compared with the detection range of the bulk-wave-based detection
damage [31];
technology, those using ultrasonic-guided waves have a wide detection
debonding
defect [147] range and high detection efficiency and are widely used for damage
Laser Sparse Contactless High resolution Delamination detection in large composite plates in the aerospace field. After clari­
ultrasonic [148,149]; fying the propagation characteristics of guided waves, they can be
debonding combined with phased array, air-coupled, and laser ultrasound detec­
defect [150]
tion technologies to excite guided waves and detect damage in

9
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Fig. 9. Flowchart of the TFM imaging method to image damage in composite materials.

Table 5
Comparison of damage imaging results by TFM under different conditions.
Actual damage size Transducer frequency (MHz) Coupling layer Acoustic model Damage imaging Reference

1.5 mm-diameter 2.25 No coupling layer Isotropic

[155]
side-drilled holes

2.25 No coupling layer Homogenization

[155]

5 Coupling gel Homogenization

[119]

5 Plexiglass-coupled Anisotropic heterogeneous

[133]

10
H. Yang et al.
composite laminates to achieve a wide range of structural health
monitoring.
5.1. Acoustic models
(1) Quasi-isotropic model
Guided waves are related to material parameters and boundary
conditions. Their multimode nature and dispersion characteristics, such
as Lamb waves propagating in plates, are more complex than those of
bulk waves. Theoretically, owing to the anisotropy of composite lami­
nates, the propagation characteristics of Lamb waves in composite ma­
terials are related to their direction of propagation. However, if
sufficient plies with different carbon fiber orientations are selected, the
obtained laminate can be considered a quasi-isotropic model [167,168].
For example, the lamination order of the CFRP is [0/90/− 45/45]2,
which can be regarded as a quasi-isotropic composite plate [169].
(2) Anisotropic model
The anisotropic properties of composite structures introduce several
complex phenomena into wave propagation, such as differences be­
tween the phase and group velocities. Methods, such as FEM [170],
semi-analytical finite element approach [171], transfer matrix method
[172], global matrix method [173], and spectral element method [174],
have been proposed to determine the guided wave propagation char­
acteristics in composite materials. Although FEM is easy to implement
and can be applied to CFRP laminates with multiple lay-up directions, its
calculation is time-consuming. Compared with other methods, transfer
and global matrix methods have been widely adopted. Although the
transfer matrix method is more convenient to implement, it can lead to
numerical instability. The global matrix method can eliminate insta­
bility by increasing the frequency-thickness products. Li et al. [174]
modeled three types of composite laminates using 3D spectral elements
and investigated their wave propagation characteristics in composite
laminates. They demonstrated that the antisymmetric mode is more
suitable for identifying delamination in composite structures. He et al.
[175] employed the Legendre orthogonal polynomial method of
Fig. 10. Flowchart of the damage detection technology based on ultrasonic guided waves.
11
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
mathematical approximation to derive and solve the guided-wave
equation for anisotropic composite laminates.
In addition, researchers have conducted a series of studies on the
guided-wave attenuation problem in composite materials, including
research on attenuation models and guided-wave attenuation problems.
Attenuation models include the hysteretic [176], Rayleigh [177], and
Kelvin–Voigt models [178]. For example, Gresil et al. [179] developed a
Rayleigh damping model to investigate the propagation of attenuated
guided waves in CFRP laminates. Shen [178] and Mei [180] performed
theoretical and experimental studies on composite plates using the
Kelvin–Voigt model; the experimental results demonstrated the accu­
racy of the attenuation model.
5.2. Damage detection technology
In the mid-1990 s, Guo et al. [181] were the first to apply ultrasonic
Lamb waves to detect delamination defects in composite laminates.
Based on the distinct propagation characteristics of guided waves, the
PAUT, laser ultrasound, and air-coupled detection technologies must be
combined with excited guided waves to detect damage in thin composite
plates and realize a wide range of structural health monitoring. The
diagnostic imaging process for a composite material with damage based
on ultrasonic guided wave detection technology is shown in Fig. 10.
(1) Phased array detection technology
Phased array detection technology based on guided waves has been
extensively studied on metal plate structures [182–186]. However,
beamforming is challenging because of the anisotropic strength of
composites. For example, Yan et al. [187,188] studied the guided-wave
beam steering of a linear phased array. They selected quasi-isotropic
guided-wave modes for beam steering to suppress the anisotropic ef­
fect. Vishnuvardhan et al. [189] utilized a single-transmitter multiple-
receiver array to detect impaction delamination in quasi-isotropic
composite plates. Leleux et al. [190] used a phased array to activate
an S0 mode excitation signal at 0.5 MHz for defect detection in a com­
posite plate. However, this method is limited to the phase and group
H. Yang et al.
velocities in the same direction. Purekar and Pines [191] investigated
the ability of a 1D linear phased array to detect delamination in
composite-laminated plates; reportedly, the array could detect damages
when the phase and group velocities had the same direction. Yu and Tian
[192] presented a phased array algorithm in which direction-dependent
guided wave parameters and skew energy effects were considered.
Damage was detected in the composite plate, and multiple surface de­
fects were detected in various directions.
(2) Air-coupled detection technology
The mode-tuning potential of ultrasonic guided waves has excellent
sensitivity to different defects in composite materials, such as delami­
nation. By selecting an appropriate incidence angle, Lamb waves can be
generated and detected using air-coupled sensors [193]. Yan et al. [194]
controlled the Lamb wave mode by tuning the incident angle. The
threshold levels were set to determine the severity of defects by
analyzing the color map magnitude. Furthermore, Liu et al. [195,196]
reported that air-coupled transducers directionally receive waves re­
flected on delamination damage; thus, the damage size and location at
both ends of the composite beams can be determined through the re­
flected waves. To promote the industrial application of air-coupled ul­
trasonic testing in the aerospace and aviation fields, integrated,
automatic, and intelligent air-coupled ultrasonic detection equipment
must be developed according to the composite material characteristics.
(3) Laser ultrasonic detection technology
Zhang et al. [197] proposed an improved imaging method based on
anomalous incident wave energy using laser ultrasonic scanning tech­
nology. The changes in the wave energy distribution caused by the
damage can reveal the damage’s size and shape. Although the laser ul­
trasonic detection technology is advantageous for damage detection in
composite materials, its application cost is much higher than that of
other detection methods. Therefore, low-cost, miniaturized laser ultra­
sonic testing equipment must be developed. Detection technology based
on ultrasonic guided waves has the advantages of a long propagation
distance, fast response, and the ability to inspect parts that are difficult
to inspect using traditional ultrasonic detection technologies. Conse­
quently, it is suitable for qualitatively detecting defects, such as
debonding, cracks, and corrosion, in large-area composite thin-wall
structures.
Moreover, composite structures may be affected by external factors
such as temperature changes and vibrations. Salamone et al. [198], Gao
et al. [199], Wang et al. [200], and Sun et al. [201] conducted damage
detection studies on composite laminated plates in variable temperature
environments. Additionally, other studies have investigated the effect of
temperature on the dispersion curve of guided waves [202] and the
conductive strain capacity of the sensor rubber layer [203], as well as
temperature compensation [204].
5.3. Imaging methods
Currently, various guided-wave diagnostic imaging methods are
available based on different imaging principles and calculation pro­
cesses. These include time reversal, delay-and-sum, and probability
imaging methods.
(1) Time reversal imaging
In the time reversal imaging method, the received signal is first
reversed in the time domain and then retransmitted from the received
position. After the signal is processed by time reversal, acoustic waves
along different paths arrive simultaneously at the receiving transducer
in the same phase and are superimposed to achieve focus. For instance,
Liu et al. [205] used a virtual time-reversal algorithm, which is a
baseline-free delamination inspection technique for composite plates, to
detect delaminations of different shapes and sizes. Mustapha et al. [206]
utilized a time-reversal imaging method to identify multiple debonding
areas of tapered composite sandwich panels. Gao et al. [207] studied
single and multiple damages on an armor composite, and used the time-
reversal method to monitor and image the damage. A Lamb wave virtual
12
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
time reversal algorithm based on the compensation of the transducer
transfer function can improve the damage location accuracy and can be
verified using a simulation model. The time-reversal method is inde­
pendent of the reference signal and has been remarkably effective in
damage-location imaging of composite materials.
(2) Delay-and-sum imaging
The delay-and-sum (DAS) imaging method was used to locate dam­
age by docking the damaged scattered echo signal and combining the
group velocity and propagation time of the guided waves. Several re­
searchers have employed this method or improved the versions of
damage imaging. For example, Sharif-Khodaei et al. [208] detected the
impact damage in composites using a modified DAS algorithm.
Furthermore, Ren et al. [209] proposed a Gaussian mixture model and
DAS method for the 4D imaging of composite aircraft damage, which
experimented with time- and temperature-varying conditions (Fig. 11).
Xu et al. [210] used sparse reconstruction and DAS methods to visualize
the damage to composite laminates that compress the scattering signals
because they contain information about the arrival time of each echo. A
comparison of the imaging results is presented in Fig. 12. The DAS al­
gorithm requires only sparse sensor networks in its structure and is
simple and computationally efficient.
(3) Probability imaging
In probability imaging, damage index (DI) is introduced to charac­
terize the degree of signal transformation caused by damage. Typically,
the difference between the reference signal and the current state can be
quantified. When the sensing path is closer to the damage, the DI of the
path caused by the damage is more extensive; conversely, when the
sensing path is farther away from the damage, the DI of the path caused
by the damage is smaller. Wu et al. [211] used seven damage indices of
guided waves in the time domain and spectrum to calculate the proba­
bility of signal paths and locate the damage. To overcome the limitations
of probability-imaging methods, Jin et al. [212] optimized the damage
shape factor of the damage paths and identified multiple defects in
curved composite structures (the results are presented in Fig. 13). Liu
et al. [213] developed a velocity anisotropy probability imaging method
to detect damage in multilayered composite plates. The number of paths
and the selection of damage indices are critical for probabilistic imaging
methods.
Nevertheless, factors affecting the effectiveness of probabilistic
damage imaging diagnosis include the frequency, sensor path network,
and size of the effective elliptical distribution area. To this end, Wu et al.
[211] proposed using multiple-frequency fusion images to eliminate the
effect of different frequencies and proposed an optimization plan to
improve the damage identification effect of other influencing factors,
thus successfully improving the damage localization accuracy in CFRP
plates. With regard to the impact of density on the probability imaging
performance in sensor networks, Liu et al. [214] improved the proba­
bility imaging method by combining full summation and full multipli­
cation methods [215]. Consequently, the effect of the uneven
probability distribution was eliminated, and the detection accuracy and
reliability were improved. Zhu et al. [216,217] proposed an improved
probability-weighted damage imaging algorithm based on an electro­
mechanical impedance structural health monitoring method to detect
debonding inside a honeycomb sandwich composite structure
effectively.
5.4. Summary
Detection technologies based on guided waves have the advantages
of a wide detection range and high detection efficiency; however, their
resolution for the detection and recognition of small damages is poor.
Consequently, existing ultrasonic detection technologies can be com­
bined to improve detection outcomes. For example, Spytek et al. [218]
combined the advantages of bulk and guided waves and proposed two
damage assessment frameworks. First, a guided wave quickly scans a
large area of a complex composite plate; subsequently, high-frequency
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Fig. 11. Principle of the proposed 4D imaging method [209].

Fig. 12. Normalized imaging results for one simulated damage: (a) Original imaging result using the DAS method; (b) Original imaging result using the matching
compression delay-and-sum (MCDAS) method; (c) Filtered image for (a) using a threshold of 0.5; (d) Filtered image for (b) using a threshold of 0.5. The white dots
denote the PZT locations and the triangles denote the actual simulated damage location [210].

laser ultrasonic detection technology is applied to the defect area to
achieve high-resolution damage imaging. Therefore, the corresponding
ultrasonic testing technology must be selected based on the actual
testing requirements and environment.
6. Damage assessment and service life prediction for composites
remaining service life of the structure modules (Fig. 14). Non-
destructive testing/structural health monitoring technologies currently
focus on the detection and location of damage; that is, damage is
detected during manufacturing and service. Inputting the test results
into a structural residual life model and thereby developing a digital
twin for structural state prediction are challenging.

Damage evaluation comprises damage detection/identification,

damage location, damage quantification, and prediction of the

13
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Fig. 13. Identification results of the probabilistic damage imaging (PDI) and modified probabilistic damage imaging (MPDI) for different defect depths: (a) Prop­
agation of different defect depths; (b) PDI result in a depth of 0.6 mm; (c) PDI result in a depth of 1.2 mm; (d) PDI result in a depth of 1.8 mm; (e) MPDI result in a
depth of 0.6 mm; (f) MPDI result in a depth of 1.2 mm; (g) MPDI result in a depth of 1.8 mm [212].

6.1. Damage assessment criteria
The structural form of composite materials is often complex, and the
damage exhibits diverse characteristics. Quantitative assessment
methods for damage are classified into three categories [219,220]: (1)
methods based on ultrasonic signal amplitude (for example, the in­
tensity drop method (–6 dB-drop method [221]), which is used as the
criterion to determine the shape and size of the detected damage), (2)
methods based on the travel time (for example the tip echo measurement
and time-of-fight-diffraction methods), and (3) model-based digital
analysis methods [222] (such as the quantitative study of delamination
in composite materials using the Gauss Hermite acoustic beam model
[223]). Moreover, damage assessment methods in structural health
monitoring research are based on structural modal parameters, such as
natural frequency and frequency response function methods. The Lamb
wave response signals propagated in the composite structures were
analyzed at various scales to identify multi-characteristic parameters
reflecting the development and changes in structural damage. The
tracking and monitoring of composite structure damage has been stud­
ied using the nonlinear mapping ability of neural networks [224].
Moreover, damage evaluation problems for composite structures have
been investigated to provide feasible ideas for ensuring structural safety.
As indicated in Table 6, most factories develop the corresponding
standards for detecting delamination damage in composite plates.
However, a uniform standard has not yet been established for other
types of damage detection, and these detections rely primarily on the
professional expertise of inspectors; thus, the damage type, size, and
shape cannot be assessed consistently and quantitatively.
Damage formation in composite material is a complex process; the
layers, material systems, and boundary conditions can affect the damage
mode. Various damage failure criteria have been proposed to describe
the failure process of composites and verified through simulations.
Hashin [235] proposed the Hashin criterion to distinguish between fiber
and matrix failures and their failure forms. Chang et al. [236] proposed a
failure criterion that considered material nonlinearity.
6.2. Service life prediction method
The residual strength and fatigue properties of the composites
significantly deteriorated with internal damage. Therefore, the service

14
H. Yang et al.
Fig. 14. Damage evaluation modules.
life of damaged composites must be investigated.
For example, wind turbine blades made of composite materials are
subjected to low-energy impacts from flying birds or sand. Such impacts
can damage the blades, thus severely affecting their in-service safety and
life. Several researchers have analyzed the effect of impact damage on
fatigue life and proposed methods to predict the residual life of com­
posite materials with damage. Zhang et al. [237] studied the effects of
low-velocity impacts and static indentation on the fatigue lives of
composites. Beheshty et al. [238,239] proposed a life prediction method
for four types of composites. The remaining service life of the composite
was predicted experimentally using the equal-life prediction method.
Kang et al. [240] studied the fatigue behavior of plain E-glass/epoxy
composites under impact damage with constant and variable amplitude
loads. The constant-amplitude fatigue life of the impact composites can
be determined by establishing a prediction model for the composites. By
contrast, Koo et al. [241] predicted the fatigue life of C-shaped struc­
tures of CFRP laminates using a shape factor with structural
characteristics.
Current research is focused primarily on the accurate calculation of
the strain energy release rate at the delamination crack tip for service
life prediction of composite laminates. Delamination propagation can be
determined by comparing the calculated values with the critical value
[242].
This study focused primarily on the service life prediction of com­
posite materials with various damage types under constant-amplitude
loading. However, composite structures can be subjected to a series of
complex loads and environmental tests in service, such as changes in
flight conditions, thus leading to load changes. Consequently, the key to
determining the remaining service life of composite structures involves
predicting their fatigue life using a loss function under variable-
amplitude loading.
6.3. Summary
The accurate realization of damage diagnosis, assessment, and re­
sidual life estimation is the premise for developing maintenance
methods for composite structures. This section summarizes the ASTM
damage detection standards, damage assessment methods, and residual
15
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
life analysis methods. Modeling and analysis should be performed ac­
cording to different material properties, and the evaluation results of the
composite service reliability should be provided for damage tolerance
requirements.
7. Challenges
As illustrated in Fig. 15, ultrasonic testing technology for parameter
estimation and damage detection of composite materials has substan­
tially progressed in recent decades. New technologies and methods have
brought new development momentum and direction to this field.
However, with the continuous development of new composite materials
with complex structures, certain challenges regarding the efficient,
reliable, and accurate detection and evaluation of various damage types
to these materials still remain. This section describes the possible chal­
lenges and future directions.
(a) Developing acoustic models of different composites in complex
environments
In a broad sense, composite materials comprise two or more single
materials artificially compounded using physical or chemical methods
into a multiphase solid material with a complex structure. There are
significant differences between different composite materials with their
own performance advantages. In addition, during service periods in
various environments, acoustic models of composite materials with
different structures, such as for damage detection of composite struc­
tures with geometrical complexity in water or covered with ice, must be
urgently developed. More importantly, the damage types and causes
differ in various environments.
(b) Combining multiple ultrasonic-testing technologies
Owing to the complex curing processes and service conditions of
composite materials as well as the numerous state parameters, the in­
formation required to characterize the structural state of composite
materials quantitatively is difficult to obtain using a single ultrasonic
testing technique. To this end, a multifield-coupled sensor network that
combines multiple ultrasonic testing technologies must be established
(Fig. 16).
(c) Developing faster damage monitoring system for composite
materials
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Table 6 composite materials

Standards for damage detection of composite materials. Establishing damage detection criteria is beneficial for optimizing
No. Publishing Standard Standard Name Reference composite structures. Owing to the wide variety of composites and
department number damage types, few criteria have been proposed for evaluating damages
1 American Society for E2580 Standard practice for [225] in these materials. The present study focused on the life prediction of
Testing and Materials ultrasonic testing of composite materials with various damage types under constant-
flat panel composites amplitude loading. Therefore, further investigation is required under
and sandwich core different conditions.
materials used in
aerospace
(e) Automatic ultrasonic testing system combined with intelligent
applications damage assessment method
2 American Society for E2533 Standard guide for [226] With the rapid development of computer science, informatics, and
Testing and Materials non-destructive electronics technologies, combining artificial intelligence, robotics, in­
testing of polymer
formation fusion, and other related technologies with ultrasonic non-
matrix composites
used in aerospace destructive testing technology is urgent. In addition, it can help
applications develop a fully automatic ultrasonic testing system that combines ma­
3 American Society for E3370 Standard practice for [227] terial parameter measurement and intelligent damage diagnosis
Testing and Materials matrix array methods to realize online detection and evaluation of large complex
ultrasonic testing of
composites,
composite equipment.
sandwich core
constructions, and 8. Conclusions
metals used in
aerospace
This study comprehensively reviewed recent progress in ultrasonic
applications
4 American Society for E1495 Standard guide for [228] detection methods for parameter measurement and damage diagnosis in
Testing and Materials acousto-ultrasonic composite materials. Based on these observations, the following con­
assessment of clusions were drawn.
composites, (a) Direct measurement and inversion methods for composite ma­
laminates, and
bonded joints
terial parameters were reviewed. Ultrasonic measurements were
5 American Society for E1736 Standard practice for [229] revealed to be more reliable compared with conventional direct mea­
Testing and Materials acousto-ultrasonic surements for obtaining composite material parameters non-
assessment of destructively.
filament-wound
(b) Different damage types and their effects on the composite ma­
pressure vessels
6 American Society for E2981 Standard guide for [230] terials were analyzed. The ultrasonic testing techniques should be
Testing and Materials nondestructive selected based on specific damage characteristics.
examination of (c) The ultrasonic testing technology is a reliable non-destructive
composite overwraps testing method for structural health monitoring with broad application
in filament wound
pressure vessels used
prospects for composite material damage detection. The advantages of
in aerospace simplicity, efficiency, low cost, and high detection accuracy render it an
applications effective method for detecting various damage types and material pa­
7 US military standard MIL-HDBK- Nondestructive [231] rameters of composites.
787 testing methods of
(d) Several methods for determining damaged areas using
composite materials-
ultrasonic ultrasound-derived images have been proposed for damage morphology
8 China National GB/T Ultrasonic testing [232] evaluation. Criteria for the damage diagnosis of various composite ma­
Standardization 38537–2020 method for fiber- terials have been introduced. Based on damage severity assessment, this
Administration reinforced resin article reviews the life-prediction methods for composite materials
matrix composites,
C-scan method
containing the damage.
9 Ministry of Industry CB/T Ultrasonic testing [233] (e) Despite the significant prospects of ultrasonic methods for com­
and Information 4257–2013 method of marine posite material damage detection and evaluation, several challenges still
Technology of the metallic composite remain in detecting damage in complex geometric structures under
People’s Republic of
various environments. Follow-up studies were conducted, including
China
10 China Aero HB Ultrasonic phased [234] developing acoustic models for different composites, combining multi­
Polytechnical 20543–2018 array inspecting ple ultrasonic testing technologies, developing fast damage monitoring
Establishment methods for fiber- systems, and establishing criteria for predicting the remaining service
reinforced polymer life of damaged composite materials.
matrix composites
Thus, the ultrasonic method is promising for detecting and evalu­
ating composite material damage. However, intensive investigation and
In recent years, scholars have merged modern computer science improvement are needed for further development toward more
techniques such as parallel computing, graphics processing unit accel­ advanced capabilities.
eration, multithread acquisition, and field-programmable gate arrays
with ultrasonic detection imaging technologies to realize real-time CRediT authorship contribution statement
metal damage imaging [243,244]. However, owing to the anisotropy
of composites, the methods for calculating the acoustic time of com­ Hongjuan Yang: Investigation, Data curation, Formal analysis,
posites are complex. Thus, the damage-diagnosis imaging algorithm Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.
should be optimized to realize industrialized real-time imaging of Lei Yang: Supervision, Funding acquisition, Writing - review & editing.
composites based on the anisotropic acoustic model. Zhengyan Yang: Investigation, Data curation, Visualization, Writing –
(d) Establishing the criteria and service life predictions for damaged review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition. Yinan Shan:
Investigation, Writing - review & editing. Haosen Gu: Investigation,

16
H. Yang et al. Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554

Fig. 15. Main literature atlas in the recent decades.

2022YFB3402500), the National Natural Science Foundation of China

(Grant No. 62101090 and 12102075), the Young Elite Scientists Spon­
sorship Program by CAST (2022QNRC001), the Natural Science Foun­
dation of Liaoning Province of China (No. 2022-MS-422), Science and
Technology Research Project of Liaoning Provincial Department of Ed­
ucation (No. LJKMZ20221908), and the Postdoctoral Science Founda­
tion of China (Grant No. 2022M720629 and 2021M700656).

References

Fig. 16. Damage detection of composite materials using multiple ultrasonic
testing techniques.
Software, Writing - original draft. Jitong Ma: Writing – review & edit­
ing. Xu Zeng: Investigation, Writing – original draft, Resources. Tong
Tian: Investigation, Writing – original draft. Shuyi Ma: Investigation,
Resources. Zhanjun Wu: Supervision, Project administration, Funding
acquisition.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Key Research and Devel­
opment Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFA0702800 and
[1] Garnier C, Pastor ML, Eyma F, et al. The detection of aeronautical defects in-situ
on composite structures using non destructive testing. Compos Struct 2011;93(5):
1328–36.
[2] Katnam KB, Dasilva LFM, Young TM. Bonded repair of composite aircraft
structures: A review of scientific challenges and opportunities. Prog Aerospace Sci
2013, 61(aug.): 26-42.
[3] Drewry MA, Georgiou GA. A review of NDT techniques for wind turbines. Insight
- Non-Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring 2007;49(3):137–41.
[4] Ciang CC, Lee J-R, Bang H-J. Structural health monitoring for a wind turbine
system: a review of damage detection methods. Meas Sci Technol 2008;19(12):
122001.
[5] Raišutis R, Jasiūnienė E, Šliteris R, et al. The review of non-destructive testing
techniques suitable for inspection of the wind turbine blades. Ultragarsas/
Ultrasound 2008;63(2):26–30.
[6] Galappaththi De silva a. k. m., macdonald m., UIK, et al. Review of inspection and
quality control techniques for composite wind turbine blades. Insight-Non-
Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring 2012;54(2):82–5.
[7] Greene E. Marine composites non-destructive evaluation. Ship Structure 2014;1:
416–27.
[8] Soutis C. Fibre reinforced composites in aircraft construction. Prog Aerosp Sci
2005;41(2):143–51.
[9] Wang B, Zhong S, Lee TL, et al. Non-destructive testing and evaluation of
composite materials/structures: A state-of-the-art review. Adv Mech Eng 2020;12
(4):152–69.
[10] Cong Pei z. j., deines t. w., WL, et al. Rotary ultrasonic machining of CFRP using
cold air as coolant: feasible regions. J Reinf Plast Compos 2011;30(10):899–906.
[11] Feito JOSé D.-Á., ANTONIO D.-Á N, et al. Experimental analysis of the influence
of drill point angle and wear on the drilling of woven CFRPs. Materials 2014;7(6):
4258–71.
[12] Naebe M, Abolhasani MM, Khayyam H, et al. Crack damage in polymers and
composites: A review. Polym Rev 2016;56(1):31–69.
[13] Asif M, Khan MA, Khan SZ, et al. Identification of an effective nondestructive
technique for bond defect determination in laminate composites—A technical
review. J Compos Mater 2018;52(26):3589–99.
[14] Jolly MR, Prabhakar A, Sturzu B, et al. Review of non-destructive testing (NDT)
techniques and their applicability to thick walled composites. Procedia CIRP
2015;38:129–36.
[15] Mook G, Pohl J, Michel F. Non-destructive characterization of smart CFRP
structures. Smart Mater Struct 2003;12(6):997–1004.
[16] Ibrahim ME. Nondestructive evaluation of thick-section composites and sandwich
structures: A review. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 2014;64:36–48.

17
H. Yang et al.
[17] David K HSU. Nondestructive evaluation of sandwich structures: a review of some
inspection techniques. J Sandw Struct Mater 2009;11(4):275–91.
[18] Schilling PJ, Karedla Bpr, Tatiparthi AK, et al. X-ray computed microtomography
of internal damage in fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites. Compos Sci &
Technol, 2005, 65(14): 2071-2078.
[19] Tan KT, Watanabe N, Iwahori Y. X-ray radiography and micro-computed
tomography examination of damage characteristics in stitched composites
subjected to impact loading. Compos B 2011;42(4):874–84.
[20] Gong Y, Luo J, Shao H, et al. A transfer learning object detection model for defects
detection in X-ray images of spacecraft composite structures. Compos Struct
2022;284:115136.
[21] Nikishkov Y, Airoldi L, Makeev A. Measurement of voids in composites by X-ray
computed tomography. Compos Sci Technol 2013;89:89–97.
[22] Ping L, Groves RM, Benedictus R. 3D monitoring of delamination growth in a
wind turbine blade composite using optical coherence tomography. NDT and E
Int 2014;64(jun.):52–8.
[23] Badcock RA, Fernando GF. An intensity-based optical fibre sensor for fatigue
damage detection in advanced fibre-reinforced composites. Smart Mater Struct
1999;4(4):223–30.
[24] Lam P-M, Lau K-T, Ling H. et al. Acousto-ultrasonic sensing for delaminated GFRP
composites using an embedded FBG sensor. Optics & Lasers in Engineering, 2009,
47(10): 1049-1055.
[25] Wu Q, Yu F, Okabe Y, et al. Application of a novel optical fiber sensor to detection
of acoustic emissions by various damages in CFRP laminates. Smart Mater Struct
2015;24(1):1–10.
[26] Lu Z, Zhang Q, Liu X. New magnetic particle cassette NDT intelligent detection
device. proceedings of the 2013 Fourth International Conference on Intelligent
Systems Design and Engineering Applications, IEEE, 2013: 403-406.
[27] Toubal L, Karama M, Lorrain B. Damage evolution and infrared thermography in
woven composite laminates under fatigue loading. Int J Fatigue 2006;28(12):
1867–72.
[28] Park HS, Choi MY, Park JH, et al. Study on the qualitative defects detection in
composites by optical infrared thermography. J Korean Soc Nondestructive
Testing, 2011, 31(2): 150-156.
[29] Toscano C, Meola C, Iorio MC, et al. Porosity and inclusion detection in CFRP by
infrared thermography. Adv Opt Technol 2012;2012:1–6.
[30] Pan YP, Miller RA, Chu TP, et al. Detection of defects in commercial C/C
composites using infrared thermography. Proceedings of the SEM Annual
Conference and Exposition on Experimental and Applied Mechanics, 2009.
[31] Imielińska K, Castaings M, Wojtyra R, et al. Air-coupled ultrasonic C-scan
technique in impact response testing of carbon fibre and hybrid: glass, carbon and
Kevlar/epoxy composites. J Mater Process Technol 2004;157–158:513–22.
[32] Cacciola M, Calcagno S, Morabito FC, et al. Computational intelligence aspects for
defect classification in aeronautic composites by using ultrasonic pulses. IEEE
Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control 2008;55(4):870–8.
[33] Kramb VA, John R, Stubbs D. A. A study of the damage progression from notches
in an oxide/oxide ceramic–matrix composite using ultrasonic C-scans. Compos
Sci & Technol, 2001, 61(11): 1561-1570.
[34] Emma LMR, Rezaee Hajidehi M, Rizzo P, et al. Ultrasonic inspection for the
detection of debonding in CFRP-reinforced concrete. Structure and Infrastructure
Engineering, 2017: 1-10.
[35] Pagodinas D. Ultrasonic signal processing methods for detection of defects in
composite materials. Ultragarsas/Ultrasound 2002;45(4):47–54.
[36] Scarponi C, Briotti G. Ultrasonic detection of delaminations on composite
materials. J Reinf Plast Compos 1997;16(9):768–90.
[37] Drinkwater BW, Wilcox PD. Ultrasonic arrays for non-destructive evaluation: A
review. NDT & E International, 2006, 39(7): 525-541.
[38] Shakibi B, Honarvar F, Mdc MOLES, et al. Resolution enhancement of ultrasonic
defect signals for crack sizing. NDT and E Int 2012;52(none):37–50.
[39] Su Z, Lin Y, Ye L. Guided lamb waves for identification of damage in composite
structures: A review. J Sound Vib 2006;295(3–5):753–80.
[40] Gholizadeh S. A review of non-destructive testing methods of composite
materials. Procedia Struct Integrity 2016;1:50–7.
[41] Rokhlin SI, Wang L. Ultrasonic waves in layered anisotropic media:
characterization of multidirectional composites. Int J Solids Struct 2002;39(16):
4133–49.
[42] Hamstad MA. A review: acoustic emission, a tool for composite-materials studies.
Exp Mech 1986;26:7–13.
[43] Worden K, Manson G, Allman D. Experimental validation of a structural health
monitoring methodology: Part I. Novelty detection on a laboratory structure.
J Sound Vib 2003;259(2):323–43.
[44] Duchene P, Chaki S, Ayadi A, et al. A review of non-destructive techniques used
for mechanical damage assessment in polymer composites. J Mater Sci 2018;53
(11):7915–38.
[45] Chen J, Yu Z, Jin H. Nondestructive testing and evaluation techniques of defects
in fiber-reinforced polymer composites: A review. Front Mater 2022;9:986645.
[46] Gupta R, Mitchell D, Flynn D, Blanche J, Harper S, Tang W. A review of sensing
technologies for non-destructive evaluation of structural composite materials.
J Compos Sci 2021;5(12):319.
[47] Ibrahim ME. Nondestructive evaluation of thick-section composites and sandwich
structures: A review. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 2014;64:36–48.
[48] Wang X, Cheng Z, Cheng L, et al. Non-destructive testing of internal defects in
composite post insulators using microwave technique. proceedings of the 2021
International Conference on Sensing, Measurement & Data Analytics in the era of
Artificial Intelligence (ICSMD), IEEE, 2021: 1-5.
18
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
[49] Francesco C, Pooya M, Fulvio P, et al. Recent advances in active infrared
thermography for non-destructive testing of aerospace components. Sensors
2018;18(2):609–46.
[50] Hung YY, Yang LX, Huang YH. Non-destructive evaluation (NDE) of composites:
digital shearography. Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) of Polymer Matrix
Composites, 2013: 84-115.
[51] Ibrahim ME. Nondestructive testing and structural health monitoring of marine
composite structures - ScienceDirect. Marine Applications of Advanced Fibre-
Reinforced Composites 2016:147–83.
[52] Chaki S, Krawczak P. Non-destructive health monitoring of structural polymer
composites: trends and perspectives in the digital era. Materials 2022;15(21):
7838–56.
[53] Boopathy G, Surendar G, Nema A, et al. Review on non-destructive testing of
composite materials in aircraft applications. Int J Mech Eng & Technol 2017;8(8):
1334–42.
[54] Yang Z, Yang H, Tian T, et al. A review in guided-ultrasonic-wave-based
structural health monitoring: From fundamental theory to machine learning
techniques. Ultrasonics 2023;133:107014.
[55] Muhammad A, Majid T, Khaled G, et al. Recent advances in drilling of carbon
fiber–reinforced polymers for aerospace applications: a review. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2019;105(5a6):1–20.
[56] Latha BV, et al. Modeling and optimization of process parameters for
delamination in drilling glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) composites. Mach
Sci Technol 2011;15(2):172–91.
[57] Khan ZM. A study of the drilling of advanced carbon fibre composites. University
of Salford (United Kingdom) 1991.
[58] Mallick PK. Fiber-reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing, and design.
CRC Press; 2007.
[59] Jinyang XU, Chao LI, Sipei MI, et al. Study of drilling-induced defects for CFRP
composites using new criteria. Compos Struct 2018;2018(201):1076–87.
[60] Qiu X, Li P, Niu Q, et al. Influence of machining parameters and tool structure on
cutting force and hole wall damage in drilling CFRP with stepped drills. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 2018;2018(97):857–65.
[61] Chen WC. Some experimental investigations in the drilling of carbon fiber-
reinforced plastic (CFRP) composite laminates. Int J Mach Tool Manu 1997;37(8):
1097–108.
[62] Faraz A, Biermann D, Weinert K. Cutting edge rounding: An innovative tool wear
criterion in drilling CFRP composite laminates. Int J Mach Tool Manu 2009;49
(15):1185–96.
[63] Silva DNRD. Image processing methodology for assessment of drilling induced
damage in CFRP. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia 2013.
[64] Staszewski WJ, Mahzan S, Traynor R. Health monitoring of aerospace composite
structures–Active and passive approach. Compos Sci Technol 2009;69(11–12):
1678–85.
[65] Teichman HC, Tadros RN. Analytical and experimental simulation of fan blade
behavior and damage under bird impact. Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
1991;113(4):582–94.
[66] Breen C, Guild F, Pavier M. Impact damage to thick carbon fibre reinforced plastic
composite laminates. J Mater Sci 2006;41(20):6718–24.
[67] Ciampa F, Meo M. Impact localization on a composite tail rotor blade using an
inverse filtering approach. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2014;25(15):1950–8.
[68] Kim EH, Rim MS, Lee I, et al. Composite damage model based on continuum
damage mechanics and low velocity impact analysis of composite plates. Compos
Struct 2013;95(none):123–34.
[69] Johnson A, Holzapfel M. Influence of delamination on impact damage in
composite structures. Compos Sci Technol 2006;2006(66):807–15.
[70] Murat B, Khalili P, Fromme P. Impact damage detection in composite panels using
guided ultrasonic waves. proceedings of the AIP Conference Proceedings. 2015.
[71] Grammatikos SA, Kordatos EZ, Matikas TE, et al. Current injection phase
thermography for low-velocity impact damage identification in composite
laminates. Mater Des 2014;55(mar.):429–41.
[72] Gholizadeh S. A review of non-destructive testing methods of composite
materials. Procedia Struct Integrity 2016;2016(1):50–7.
[73] Qing X, Li W, Wang Y, et al. Piezoelectric transducer-based structural health
monitoring for aircraft applications. Sensors 2019;19(3):545–72.
[74] Lv S, Wei J, Jiang M. Damage localization method for plate-like composite
structure based on valid path optimization and search point matching. Mech Syst
Sig Process 2023;2023(182):109562.
[75] Willberg C, Duczek S, Vivar-Perez JM, et al. Simulation methods for guided wave-
based structural health monitoring: a review. Appl Mech Rev 2015;67(1):010803.
[76] Balasubramaniam K, Ziaja D, Jurek M, et al. Experimental and numerical analysis
of multiple low-velocity impact damages in a glass fibered composite structure.
Materials 2021;14(23):7268–81.
[77] Diamanti K, Hodgkinson JM, Soutis C. Detection of low-velocity impact damage
in composite plates using Lamb waves. Struct Health Monit 2004;3(1):33–41.
[78] Dao PB, Staszewski WJ. Lamb wave based structural damage detection using
cointegration and fractal signal processing. Mech Syst Sig Process 2014;49(1–2):
285–301.
[79] Gorgin R, Wu Z, Gao D, et al. Damage size characterization algorithm for active
structural health monitoring using the A0 mode of Lamb waves. Smart Mater
Struct 2014;23(3):035015.
[80] Lu G, Li Y, Zhou M, et al. Detecting damage size and shape in a plate structure
using PZT transducer array. J Aerosp Eng 2018;31(5):04018075.
[81] Gorgin Y. Environmental and operational conditions effects on Lamb wave based
structural health monitoring systems: A review. Ultrasonics 2020;105(1):106114.
H. Yang et al.
[82] Boon M, Zarouchas D, Martinez M, et al. Temperature and load effects on acoustic
emission signals for structural health monitoring applications. proceedings of the
European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. 2014.
[83] Fu H, Zhang Y. On the distribution of delamination in composite structures and
compressive strength prediction for laminates with embedded delaminations.
Appl Compos Mater 2011;18(3):253–69.
[84] Luo H, Hanagud S. Delamination modes in composite plates. J Aerosp Eng 1996;9
(4):106–13.
[85] Mohammadkhani R, Fragonara Janardhan p. m, LZ, et al. Ultrasonic phased array
imaging technology for the inspection of aerospace composite structures. In:
proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 5th International Workshop on Metrology for
AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace), IEEE; 2019. p. 203–8.
[86] Zhang Z, Guo S, Li Q, et al. Ultrasonic detection and characterization of
delamination and rich resin in thick composites with waviness. Compos Sci
Technol 2020;189:108016.
[87] Chakrapani SK, Dayal V, Barnard DJ, et al. Ultrasonic Rayleigh wave inspection of
waviness in wind turbine blades: Experimental and finite element method.
proceedings of the AIP Conference Proceedings, American Institute of Physics,
2012: 1911-1917.
[88] Karihaloo BL, Xiao QZ. Modelling of stationary and growing cracks in FE
framework without remeshing: a state-of-the-art review. Comput Struct 2003;81
(3):119–29.
[89] Dolbow JE, Nadeau JC. On the use of effective properties for the fracture analysis
of microstructured materials. Eng Fract Mech 2002;69(14–16):1607–34.
[90] Ito J, Biwa S, Hayashi T, et al. Ultrasonic wave propagation in the corner section
of composite laminate structure: Numerical simulations and experiments. Compos
Struct 2015;123(may):78–87.
[91] Makradi A, Belouettar S, Kiefer-Kamal H, et al. Modelling of failure in long fibres
reinforced composites by X-FEM and cohesive zone model. Compos B Eng 2013;
55:352–61.
[92] Chu TC, Ranson WF, Sutton MA. Applications of digital-image-correlation
techniques to experimental mechanics. Exp Mech 1985;25(3):232–44.
[93] Bing P, Wang Z, Lu Z. Genuine full-field deformation measurement of an object
with complex shape using reliability-guided digital image correlation. Opt
Express 2010;18(2):1011.
[94] Grédiac M, Sur F, Blaysat B. The grid method for in-plane displacement and strain
measurement: a review and analysis. Strain 2016;52(3):205–43.
[95] Creath Slettemoen gå. K. Vibration-observation techniques for digital speckle-
pattern interferometry. J Opt Soc Am A 1985;2(10):1629–36.
[96] Castellano A, Foti P, Fraddosio A, et al. Mechanical characterization of CFRP
composites by ultrasonic immersion tests: Experimental and numerical
approaches. Compos B Eng 2014;66:299–310.
[97] Auld BA, Green RE. Acoustic fields and waves in solids. Phys Today 1974;27(10):
63–4.
[98] Rose JL. Ultrasonic guided waves in solid media: plates. proceedings of the
Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[99] Musgrave MJP. On the propagation of elastic waves in aeolotropic media. II.
media of hexagonal symmetry. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1954,
226(1166): 356-366.
[100] Markham MF. Measurement of the elastic constants of fibre composites by
ultrasonics. Composites 1969;1(2):145–9.
[101] Zimmer JE, James R. COST. Determination of the elastic constants of a
unidirectional fiber composite using ultrasonic velocity measurements. J Acoust
Soc Am 1970;47(3B):795–803.
[102] Rokhlin SI, Wang W. Double through-transmission bulk wave method for
ultrasonic phase velocity measurement and determination of elastic constants of
composite materials. J Acoust Soc Am 1992;91(6):3303–12.
[103] Rokhlin SI, Wang W. Ultrasonic evaluation of in-plane and out-of-plane elastic
properties of composite materials. Review of Progress in Quantitative
Nondestructive Evaluation: Volume 8, Part A and B. Springer 1989:1489–96.
[104] Chu, y. c.. Stability of determination of composite moduli from velocity data in
planes of symmetry for weak and strong anisotropies. J Acoust Soc Am 1994;95
(1):213–25.
[105] Minachi A, Hsu DK, Thompson RB. Single-sided determination of elastic constants
of thick composites using acoustoultrasonic technique. J Acoust Soc Am 1994;96
(1):353–62.
[106] Wong V-K, Hu Y, Tham Z, et al. Measurement of elastic constant matrix of carbon
fiber composites with an ultrasonic 2D-Array transducer. IEEE Sens J 2022;22(6):
5562–70.
[107] Robert ES. Ultrasonic elastic constants of carbon fibers and their composites.
J Appl Phys 1972;43(6):2555–61.
[108] Rokhlin SI, Chimenti DE, Nagy PB, et al. Physical ultrasonics of composites.
J Acoust Soc Am 2011;130(6):4170–2.
[109] Hosten B. Ultrasonic through-transmission method for measuring the complex
stiffness moduli of composite materials. San Diego: Academic Press; 2001.
[110] Paterson D, Ijomah W, Windmill J. Elastic constant determination of
unidirectional composite via ultrasonic bulk wave through transmission
measurements: A review. Prog Mater Sci 2018;97(AUG.):1–37.
[111] Deydier S, Gengembre N, Calmon P, et al. Ultrasonic field computation into
multilayered composite materials using a homogenization method based on ray
theory. AIP Conf Proc 2005;760(1):1057–64.
[112] Grager J-C, Schrapp M, Mooshofer H, et al. Ultrasonic Imaging of carbon fiber-
reinforced plastics using the full matrix capture data acquisition technique.
proceedings of the World Conference on Nondestructive Testing, Munich,
Germany, 2016: 1-11.
19
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
[113] Zhou B, Greenhalgh S. On the computation of elastic wave group velocities for a
general anisotropic medium. J Geophys Eng 2004;1(3):205–15.
[114] Bai Z, Chen S, Xiao Q, et al. Compressive sensing of phased array ultrasonic signal
in defect detection: Simulation study and experimental verification. Struct Health
Monit 2018;17(3):434–49.
[115] Roy O, Mahaut S, Serre M. NDT of specimen of complex geometry using ultrasonic
adaptive techniques-the FAUST system. Rev Prog Quantitative Nondestructive
Evaluation 1998;17A:1689–95.
[116] Chatillon S, Cattiaux G, Serre M, et al. Ultrasonic non-destructive testing of pieces
of complex geometry with a flexible phased array transducer. Ultrasonics 2000;38
(1–8):131–4.
[117] Freemantle RJ, Hankinson N, Brotherhood CJ. Rapid phased array ultrasonic
imaging of large area composite aerospace structures. Insight - Non-Destructive
Testing and Condition Monitoring 2005;47(3):129–32.
[118] Lin L, Cao H, Luo Z. Total focusing method imaging of multidirectional CFRP
laminate with model-based time delay correction. NDT and E Int 2018;97:51–8.
[119] Li C, Pain D, Wilcox PD, et al. Imaging composite material using ultrasonic arrays.
NDT and E Int 2013;2013(53):8–17.
[120] Cao H, Guo S, Zhang S, et al. Ray tracing method for ultrasonic array imaging of
CFRP corner part using homogenization method. NDT and E Int 2021;122:
102493.
[121] Zhang H, Peng L, Zhang H, et al. Phased array ultrasonic inspection and
automated identification of wrinkles in laminated composites. Compos Struct
2022;300:116170.
[122] Humeida Y, Pinfield VJ, Challis RE, et al. Simulation of ultrasonic array imaging
of composite materials with defects. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control
2013;60(9):1935–48.
[123] Liu M, Xiao H, Hu Q, et al. Floquet wave theory-based time-corrected ultrasonic
total focusing method for fiber-reinforced composite laminate. Ultrasonics 2021;
116:106467.
[124] Wang X, He J, Guo W, et al. Three-dimensional damage quantification of low
velocity impact damage in thin composite plates using phased-array ultrasound.
Ultrasonics 2021;110:106264.
[125] Taheri H, Hassen AA. Nondestructive ultrasonic inspection of composite
materials: A comparative advantage of phased array ultrasonic. Appl Sci 2019;9
(8):1628.
[126] Dattoma V, Panella FW, Pirinu A, et al. Ultrasonic and thermographic studies for
CFRP inspections with real and simulated defects. Mater Today: Proc, 2021, 34:
224-234.
[127] Helfen TB, Venkat RS, Rabe U, et al. Characterisation of CFRP through enhanced
ultrasonic testing methods. Appl Compos Mater 2012;19:913–9.
[128] Luo Z, Kang J, Cao H, et al. Enhanced ultrasonic total focusing imaging of CFRP
corner with ray theory-based homogenization technique. Chin J Aeronaut 2023;
36(1):434–43.
[129] Luo Z, Zhang S, Jin S, et al. Heterogeneous ultrasonic time-of-flight distribution in
multidirectional CFRP corner and its implementation into total focusing method
imaging. Compos Struct 2022;294:115789.
[130] Caminero MA, García-Moreno I, Rodríguez GP, et al. Internal damage evaluation
of composite structures using phased array ultrasonic technique: Impact damage
assessment in CFRP and 3D printed reinforced composites. Composites Part B:
Engineering, 2019, 165: 131-142.
[131] Ma T, Li Y, Zhou Z, et al. Wrinkle detection in carbon fiber-reinforced polymers
using linear phase fir-filtered ultrasonic array data. Aerospace 2023;10(2):181.
[132] Tian J, Liu M, Xiao H, et al. Optimized ultrasonic total focusing imaging of diverse
and multiple defects in crossply CFRP: Floquet wave theory, numerical
simulation, and experimental validation. Mech Syst Sig Process 2023;199:
110486.
[133] Lin L, Cao H, Luo Z. Dijkstra’s algorithm-based ray tracing method for total
focusing method imaging of CFRP laminates. Compos Struct 2019;215:298–304.
[134] Anand C, Groves RM, Benedictus R. Modeling and imaging of ultrasonic array
inspection of side drilled holes in layered anisotropic media. Sensors, 2021, 21
(14): 4640.
[135] Patil S, Reddy DM. Impact damage assessment in carbon fiber reinforced
composite using vibration-based new damage index and ultrasonic C-scanning
method. Structures 2020;28(4):638–50.
[136] Ma M, Cao H, Jiang M, et al. High precision detection method for delamination
defects in carbon fiber composite laminates based on ultrasonic technique and
signal correlation algorithm. Materials 2020;13(17):3840–60.
[137] Hasiotis T, Badogiannis E, Tsouvalis NG. Application of ultrasonic C-scan
techniques for tracing defects in laminated composite materials. Strojniški
vestnik-J Mecha Eng 2011;57(3):192–203.
[138] Iskandarani MZ. Abnormalities in ultrasonic (C-Scan) images of composite
structures: impact damaged versus hole damaged. J Comput Sci 2019;15(7):
972–82.
[139] Yang I, Yang Y, Park J, et al. Application of air-coupled ultrasonic techniques
using carbon/carbon composites. Proceedings of the Materials Science Forum,
Trans Tech Publ, 2008: 121-124.
[140] Voillaume H, Simonet D, Brousset C, et al. Analysis of commercial aeronautics
applications of laser ultrasonics for composite manufacturing. Proceedings of
ECNDT 2006;2006:1–8.
[141] Vandenrijt J-F, Languy F, Thizy C, et al. Nondestructive inspection of aerospace
composites by a fiber-coupled laser ultrasonics system. proceedings of the Fifth
International Conference on Optical and Photonics Engineering, Angleur,
Belgium: SPIE, 2017: 299-307.
H. Yang et al.
[142] Zeng L, Wang B, Liu X, et al. High-resolution air-coupled laser ultrasound imaging
of microstructure and defects in braided CFRP. Compos Commun 2021;28:
100915.
[143] Hocheng H, Tsao CC. Computerized tomography and C-scan for measuring
drilling-induced delamination in composite material using twist drill and core
drill. Key Eng Mater 2007;339:16–20.
[144] Santos M, Santos J, Reis P, et al. Ultrasonic C-scan techniques for the evaluation
of impact damage in CFRP. Materials Testing 2021;63(2):131–7.
[145] Lin L, Cao H, Luo Z. Total focusing method imaging of multidirectional CFRP
laminate with model-based time delay correction. NDT and E Int 2018;97(JUL.):
51–8.
[146] Nageswaran C, Bird CR, Takahashi R. Phased array scanning of artificial and
impact damage in carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP). Insight-Non-Destructive
Testing and Condition Monitoring, 2006, 48(3): 155-159.
[147] Kim JY, In CW, Sun KH, et al. Imaging defects in laminate composite plates using
focused shear waves generated by air-coupled transducer. Compos Struct, 2016,
152(sep.): 891-899.
[148] Ji B, Zhang Q, Cao J, et al. Delamination detection in bimetallic composite using
laser ultrasonic bulk waves. Appl Sci 2021;11(2):636.
[149] Sun G, Zhou Z, Chen X, et al. Ultrasonic characterization of delamination in
aeronautical composites using noncontact laser generation and detection. Appl
Opt 2013;52(26):6481–6.
[150] Chia CC, Jeong H-M, Lee J-R, et al. Composite aircraft debonding visualization by
laser ultrasonic scanning excitation and integrated piezoelectric sensing. Struct
Control Health Monit, 2012, 19(7): 605-620.
[151] Holmes C, Drinkwater BW, Wilcox PD. Post-processing of the full matrix of
ultrasonic transmit-receive array data for non-destructive evaluation. NDT & E
International: Independent Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation, 2005, 38(8):
701-711.
[152] Gengembre N, Calmon P, Petillon O, et al. Prediction of ultrasonic fields into
composite multi-layered structures: homogenization approach for the direct field
and statistical approach for the inner reflections. AIP Conf Proc 2003;657(1):957.
[153] Deydier S, Leymarie N, Calmon P, et al. Modeling of the Ultrasonic Propagation
into Carbon-Fiber-Reinforced Epoxy Composites, Using a Ray Theory Based
Homogenization Method. Brunswick, ME: proceedings of the American Institute
of Physics; 2006. p. 972–8.
[154] Deydier S, Gengembre N, Calmon P, et al. Ultrasonic field computation into
multilayered composite materials using a homogenization method based on ray
theory. Proc AIP Conference Proceedings, American Institute of Physics, 2005:
1057-1064.
[155] Yan D, Sutcliffe M, Wright B, et al. Ultrasonic imaging of full matrix capture
acquired data for carbon fibre-reinforced polymer. Insight: Non-Destructive
Testing and Condition Monitoring 2013;55(9):477–81.
[156] Rokhlin SI, Bolland TK, Adler L. Reflection and refraction of elastic waves on a
plane interface between two generally anisotropic media. J Acoust Soc Am 1986;
79(4):906–18.
[157] Dijkstra EW. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math
1959;1(1):269–71.
[158] Hart Member, ieee PE, et al. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of
minimum cost paths. IEEE Trans Syst Sci Cybernetics 2007;4(2):100–7.
[159] Zhou H, Han Z, Du D, et al. A combined marching and minimizing ray-tracing
algorithm developed for ultrasonic array imaging of austenitic welds. NDT & E
Int: Independent Nondestructive Testing Evaluation 2018;2018(95):45–56.
[160] Panosso perlin I., Caldas de Andrade Pinto R. Use of network theory to improve
the ultrasonic tomography in concrete. Ultrasonics 2019;96:185–95.
[161] Zielińska M, Rucka M. Detection of debonding in reinforced concrete beams using
ultrasonic transmission tomography and hybrid ray tracing technique. Constr
Build Mater 2020;262:1–16.
[162] Perkowski Z, Tatara K. The use of Dijkstra’s algorithm in assessing the correctness
of imaging brittle damage in concrete beams by means of ultrasonic transmission
tomography. Materials 2020;13(3):1–37.
[163] Fenster A, Tong S, Sherebrin S, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging.
proceedings of the Medical Imaging 1995: Physics of Medical Imaging, SPIE,
1995: 176-184.
[164] Mohammadkhani R, Zanotti fragonara I., Padiyar MJ, et al. Improving depth
resolution of ultrasonic phased array imaging to inspect aerospace composite
structures. Sensors 2020;20(2):1–18.
[165] Bulavinov A, Pinchuk R, Pudovikov S, et al. Industrial application of real-time 3D
imaging by sampling phased array. Proceedings of the European Conference for
Non-destructive Testing, Moscow, 2010: 1-9.
[166] Kitazawa S, Kono N, Baba A, et al. Three-dimensional visualisation and evaluation
techniques for volumetrically scanned data of ultrasonic phased arrays. Insight-
Non-Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring 2010;52(4):201–5.
[167] de Luca A, Caputo F, Sharif KZ, et al. Damage characterization of composite plates
under low velocity impact using ultrasonic guided waves. Compos B Eng 2018;
138:168–80.
[168] Xu C, Yang Z, Zuo H, et al. Minimum variance Lamb wave imaging based on
weighted sparse decomposition coefficients in quasi-isotropic composite
laminates. Compos Struct 2021;275:114432.
[169] Hall JS, Mckeon P, Satyanarayan I, et al. Minimum variance guided wave imaging
in a quasi-isotropic composite plate. Smart Mater Struct 2011;20(2):025013.
[170] Datta D, Kishore NN. Features of ultrasonic wave propagation to identify defects
in composite materials modelled by finite element method. NDT and E Int 1996;
29(4):213–23.
20
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
[171] Mei H, Giurgiutiu V. Predictive 1D and 2D guided-wave propagation in composite
plates using the SAFE approach. proceedings of the Health Monitoring of
Structural and Biological Systems XII, SPIE, 2018: 215-225.
[172] Thomson WT. Transmission of elastic waves through a stratified solid medium.
J Appl Phys 1950;21(2):89–93.
[173] Obenchain MB, Cesnik CES. Producing accurate wave propagation time histories
using the global matrix method. Smart Mater Struct 2013;22(12):125024.
[174] Li F, Peng H, Sun X, et al. Wave propagation analysis in composite laminates
containing a delamination using a three-dimensional spectral element method.
Math Problems Eng, 2012,(2012-5-20), 2012, 2012(PT.5): 243-253.
[175] He C, Liu H, Liu Z, et al. The propagation of coupled Lamb waves in multilayered
arbitrary anisotropic composite laminates. J Sound Vib 2013;332(26):7243–56.
[176] Mora P, Ducasse E, Deschamps M. Transient 3D elastodynamic field in an
embedded multilayered anisotropic plate. Ultrasonics 2016;69:106–15.
[177] Ramadas C, Balasubramaniam Krishnan, HOOD Avinash, et al. Modelling of
attenuation of Lamb waves using Rayleigh damping: Numerical and experimental
studies. Composite Structures, 2011, 93(8): 2020-2025.
[178] Shen Y, Cesnik CES. Hybrid local FEM/global LISA modeling of damped guided
wave propagation in complex composite structures. Smart Mater Struct 2016;25
(9):095021.
[179] Gresil M, Giurgiutiu V. Prediction of attenuated guided waves propagation in
carbon fiber composites using Rayleigh damping model. J Intell Mater Syst Struct
2015;26(16):2151–69.
[180] Mei H, Giurgiutiu V. Guided wave excitation and propagation in damped
composite plates. Struct Health Monit 2019;18(3):690–714.
[181] Guo N, Cawley P. Lamb wave propagation in composite laminates and its
relationship with acousto-ultrasonics. NDT and E Int 1993;26(2):75–84.
[182] Yu L, Giurgiutiu V. In-situ optimized PWAS phased arrays for Lamb wave
structural health monitoring. J Mech Mater Struct 2007;2(3):459–87.
[183] Ambroziński Ł, Stepinski T, Uhl T. Efficient tool for designing 2D phased arrays in
lamb waves imaging of isotropic structures. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2015;26
(17):2283–94.
[184] Engholm M, Stepinski T. Direction of arrival estimation of Lamb waves using
circular arrays. Struct Health Monit 2011;10(5):467–80.
[185] Wilcox PD. Omni-directional guided wave transducer arrays for the rapid
inspection of large areas of plate structures. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq
Control 2003;50(6):699–709.
[186] Kannajosyula H, Lissenden CJ, Rose JL. Analysis of annular phased array
transducers for ultrasonic guided wave mode control. Smart Mater Struct 2013;22
(8):085019.
[187] Yan F, Rose JL. Guided wave phased array beam steering in composite plates.
proceedings of the Health Monitoring of Structural and Biological Systems 2007,
San Diego, California: SPIE, 2007: 142-150.
[188] Yan F, Lissenden CJ, Rose JL. Directivity profiles of ultrasonic guided wave
phased arrays for multilayer composite plates. proceedings of the Health
Monitoring of Structural and Biological Systems 2009, San Diego, California:
SPIE, 2009: 340-350.
[189] Vishnuvardhan J, Muralidharan A, Krishnamurthy CV, et al. Structural health
monitoring of anisotropic plates using ultrasonic guided wave STMR array
patches. NDT and E Int 2009;42(3):193–8.
[190] Leleux A, Micheau P, Castaings M. Long range detection of defects in composite
plates using Lamb waves generated and detected by ultrasonic phased array
probes. J Nondestr Eval 2013;32(2):200–14.
[191] Purekar AS, Pines DJ. Damage detection in thin composite laminates using
piezoelectric phased sensor arrays and guided Lamb wave interrogation. J Intell
Mater Syst Struct 2010;21(10):995–1010.
[192] Yu L, Tian Z. Guided wave phased array beamforming and imaging in composite
plates. Ultrasonics 2016;68:43–53.
[193] Castaings M, Hosten B. Lamb and SH waves generated and detected by air-
coupled ultrasonic transducers in composite material plates. NDT and E Int 2001;
34(4):249–58.
[194] Yan F, Hauck E, Mor Pera T, et al. Ultrasonic guided wave imaging of a composite
plate with air-coupled transducers. proceedings of the AIP Conference
Proceedings, Oregon, USA: American Institute of Physics, 2007: 1007-1012.
[195] Liu Z, Yu H, He C, et al. Delamination detection in composite beams using pure
Lamb mode generated by air-coupled ultrasonic transducer. proceedings of the
International Conference on Advances in Structural Health Management, Jeonju,
South Korea, 2014: 541-550.
[196] Liu Z, Yu H, He C, et al. Delamination damage detection of laminated composite
beams using air-coupled ultrasonic transducers. Science China-Physics Mechanics
& Astronomy 2013;56(7):1269–79.
[197] Zhang C, Qiu J, Ji H. Laser ultrasonic imaging for impact damage visualization in
composite structure. proceedings of the EWSHM-7th European Workshop on
Structural Health Monitoring, 2014.
[198] Salamone S, Bartoli Lanza Di Scalea F. I, et al. Guided-wave health monitoring of
aircraft composite panels under changing temperature. J Intell Mater Syst Struct
2009;20(9):1079–90.
[199] Gao D, Wu Z, Yang L, et al. Structural health monitoring for long-term aircraft
storage tanks under cryogenic temperature. Aerosp Sci Technol 2019;92:881–91.
[200] Wang Y, Gao L, Yuan S, et al. An adaptive filter–based temperature compensation
technique for structural health monitoring. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2014;25(17):
2187–98.
[201] Sun H, Yi J, Xu Y, et al. Identification and compensation technique of non-
uniform temperature field for Lamb wave-and multiple sensors-based damage
detection. Sensors 2019;19(13):1–14.
H. Yang et al.
[202] Marzani A, Salamone S. Numerical prediction and experimental verification of
temperature effect on plate waves generated and received by piezoceramic
sensors. Mech Syst Sig Process 2012;30:204–17.
[203] Ha S, Lonkar K, Mittal A, et al. Adhesive layer effects on PZT-induced lamb waves
at elevated temperatures. Struct Health Monit 2010;9(3):247–56.
[204] Lu Y, Michaels JE. A methodology for structural health monitoring with diffuse
ultrasonic waves in the presence of temperature variations. Ultrasonics 2005;43
(9):717–31.
[205] Liu Z, Yu H, Fan J, et al. Baseline-free delamination inspection in composite plates
by synthesizing non-contact air-coupled Lamb wave scan method and virtual time
reversal algorithm. Smart Mater Struct 2015;24(4):045014.
[206] Mustapha S, Ye L. Propagation behaviour of guided waves in tapered sandwich
structures and debonding identification using time reversal. Wave Motion 2015;
57:154–70.
[207] Gao S, Jiang J, Zhang M. Research on damage monitoring of sandwich armor
composite structure based on time reversal principle. Proc J Phys: Conf Ser, IOP
Publishing 2022:012009.
[208] Sharif-Khodaei Z, Aliabadi MH. Assessment of delay-and-sum algorithms for
damage detection in aluminium and composite plates. Smart Mater Struct 2014;
23(7):075007.
[209] Ren Y, Qiu L, Yuan S, et al. Gaussian mixture model and delay-and-sum based 4D
imaging of damage in aircraft composite structures under time-varying
conditions. Mech Syst Sig Process 2020;135:106390.
[210] Xu C, Yang Z, Tian S, et al. Lamb wave inspection for composite laminates using a
combined method of sparse reconstruction and delay-and-sum. Compos Struct
2019;223:110973.
[211] Wu Z, Liu K, Wang Y, et al. Validation and evaluation of damage identification
using probability-based diagnostic imaging on a stiffened composite panel.
J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2015;26(16):2181–95.
[212] Jin H, Wang Y, Sun H, et al. Identification and imaging of multi-defects on a
complicated composite structure by ultrasonic guided wave. Polym Test 2022;
106:107466.
[213] Liu Y, Hong X, Zhang B. A novel velocity anisotropy probability imaging method
using ultrasonic guided waves for composite plates. Measurement 2020;166:
108087.
[214] Liu Z, Zhong X, Dong T, et al. Delamination detection in composite plates by
synthesizing time-reversed Lamb waves and a modified damage imaging
algorithm based on RAPID. Struct Control Health Monit 2016;24(5):1–17.
[215] Liu Z, Yu F, Ru W, et al. Image fusion based on single-frequency guided wave
mode signals for structural health monitoring in composite plates. Mater Eval
2013;71(12):1434–43.
[216] Zhu J, Wang Y, Qing X. A novel electromechanical impedance model for surface-
bonded circular piezoelectric transducer. Smart Mater Struct 2019;28(10):1–12.
[217] Zhu J, Qing X, Liu X, et al. Electromechanical impedance-based damage
localization with novel signatures extraction methodology and modified
probability-weighted algorithm. Mech Syst Sig Process 2021;146:1–20.
[218] Spytek J, Mrowka J, Pieczonka L, et al. Multi-resolution non-contact damage
detection in complex-shaped composite laminates using ultrasound. NDT and E
Int 2020;116:1–11.
[219] Krautkramer J, Krautkramer H. Ultrasonic testing of materials. Berlin 1990.
[220] Wong BS, Tui CG, Tan KS, et al. Evaluation of small defects in carbon fibre-
reinforced composites using ultrasonic pulse echo amplitude. Insight 1997;39(4):
257–63.
[221] Guan X, He J, Rasselkorde EM. A time-domain synthetic aperture ultrasound
imaging method for material flaw quantification with validations on small-scale
artificial and natural flaws. Ultrasonics 2015;56:487–96.
[222] Schmerr LW. Fundamentals of Ultrasonic Nondestructive Evaluation.
Fundamentals of Ultrasonic Nondestructive. Evaluation 1998.
21
Composite Structures 324 (2023) 117554
[223] Minachi A, Margetan FJ, Hsu DK. Delamination sizing in composite materials
using a Gauss—Hermite beam model. Ultrasonics 1993;31(4):237–43.
[224] Alexandrino PDSL, Gomes GF, Sebastião SCJ. A robust optimization for damage
detection using multiobjective genetic algorithm, neural network and fuzzy
decision making. Inverse Prob Eng 2020;28(1):21–46.
[225] ASTM. Standard practice for ultrasonic testing of flat panel composites and
sandwich core materials used in aerospace applications. E2580:2017.
[226] ASTM. Standard guide for non–destructive testing of polymer matrix composites
used in aerospace applications. E2533:2017.
[227] ASTM. Standard practice for matrix array ultrasonic testing of composites,
sandwich core constructions, and metals used in aerospace applications. E3370.
[228] ASTM. Standard guide for acousto-ultrasonic assessment of composites,
laminates, and bonded joints E1495.
[229] ASTM. Standard practice for acousto-ultrasonic assessment of filament-wound
pressure vessels E1736.
[230] ASTM. Standard guide for nondestructive examination of composite overwraps in
filament wound pressure vessels used in aerospace applications. E2981:2015.
[231] US military standard. Nondestructive testing methods of composite materials-
ultrasonic. MIL-HDBK-787.
[232] CNSA. Ultrasonic testing method for fiber reinforced resin matrix composites – C-
scan method. GB/T 38537-2020.
[233] MIIT. Ultrasonic testing method of marine metallic composite. CB/T 4257-2013.
[234] CAPE. Ultrasonic phased array inspecting methods for fiber reinforced polymer
matrix composites. HB 20543-2018.
[235] Hashin Z. Fatigue failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites. J Appl Mech
1981;48(4):846–52.
[236] Chang F-K, Lessard LB. Damage tolerance of laminated composites containing an
open hole and subjected to compressive loadings: Part I—Analysis. J Compos
Mater, 1991, 25(1): 2-43.
[237] Zhang J, Zhao L, Li M, et al. Compressive fatigue behavior of low velocity
impacted and quasi-static indented CFRP laminates. Compos Struct 2015;133
(DEC.):1009–15.
[238] Beheshty Harris B. MH. A constant-life model of fatigue behaviour for carbon-
fibre composites: the effect of impact damage. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58(1):
9–18.
[239] Beheshty Harris b., adam t. MH. An empirical fatigue-life model for high-
performance fibre composites with and without impact damage. Compos A Appl
Sci Manuf 1999;30(8):971–87.
[240] Kang Kim j. k. KW. Fatigue life prediction of impacted glass/epoxy composites
under variable amplitude loading. proceedings of the 5th International
Conference on Fracture and Strength of Solids/2nd. 2004.
[241] Koo Choi j. h., seok c. s. JM. Prediction of post-impact residual strength and
fatigue characteristics after impact of CFRP composite structures - ScienceDirect.
Compos B Eng 2014;61(5):300–6.
[242] Xie D, Biggers SB. Strain energy release rate calculation for a moving
delamination front of arbitrary shape based on the virtual crack closure
technique. Part I: Formulation and validation. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(6):
771–85.
[243] Sutcliffe M, Weston M, Dutton B, et al. Real-time full matrix capture for ultrasonic
non-destructive testing with acceleration of post-processing through graphic
hardware. NDT and E Int 2012;51:16–23.
[244] Njiki M, Elouardi A, Bouaziz S., et al. A real-time implementation of the total
focusing method for rapid and precise diagnostic in non destructive evaluation.
proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 24th International Conference on Application-
Specific Systems, Architectures and Processors, Washington, DC: IEEE, 2013: 245-
248.