A thorough understanding of simulating Acoustic Emission (AE) requires the source modeling and propagation medium to be considered respectively. Crack initiation and propagation simulation as an AE source can be performed by the Successive Node Release (SNR) method and the Direct Node Release (DNR) method. Both are compared to show how the source model affects the AE signals. The SNR method is commonly used to simulate the crack initiation and propagation. It is necessary to consider the influence of the crack velocity profile on the crack initiation [1]. However, for the DNR method, all nodes are instantaneously released once the critical crack length is attained. Hence, it is not necessary to consider the velocity profile. Instead, it is sufficient to define the average crack velocity. However, the kinetic energy varies when employing different methods, leading to a variance in the source energy. We thus assess the suitable conditions to apply the DNR method to represent crack initiation and investigate the influence of the node release methods on the AE signals. Secondly, a comparative assessment of the Pencil-lead Break test on PMMA plates is conducted using both two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) finite element simulations. This analysis is valuable for understanding the deficiencies and constraints of the 2D simulation. However, there is a significant difference in the AE signals between 2D and 3D simulations, suggesting that the 2D simulation is unable to capture the AE information during wave propagation, in spite of its lower computational cost. Therefore, to obtain extensive and precise information from the PLB test, it is crucial to have an extensive understanding of the limits of the 2D simulation. This understanding should take into account factors such as the distance between the sensor and the source, as well as the descriptors chosen to characterize the AE.
Read full abstract