Method for supplementing and verifying load-bearing capacity classification of glass curtain wall backset embedded parts

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of glass curtain wall back embedded part's supplement and bearing capacity grading verification method, belong to building curtain wall back anchoring detection technical field, existing test lacks ultrasonic preliminary screening and pull grading link, displacement anomaly is experienced, reliability and economy are difficult to consider simultaneously.Adopt ultrasonic detection module, pull detection module and control module, first, the amplitude ratio of the first and second reflection signals of each chemical anchor bolt is obtained, remove out-of-range, retain preliminary screening qualified piece;According to the same specification and model group batch and randomly extract the first sample to carry out non-destructive pulling, record displacement when reaching design load value, then load to 1.0-1.3 times design load value and hold load at least 2 minutes, if displacement is not greater than qualified displacement threshold value, then judge qualified, otherwise extract the second sample destructive pulling, compare ultimate uplift bearing capacity and minimum threshold value, judge batch according to counting sampling rule.Mainly used for glass curtain wall back embedded part anchoring bearing capacity on-site inspection.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of quality inspection technology for post-anchoring engineering of building curtain walls, specifically involving a method for the supplementary installation and load-bearing capacity classification verification of post-installed embedded parts in glass curtain walls. Background Technology

[0002] In glass curtain wall projects, when adding post-installed embedded parts to existing buildings, the anchoring quality of chemical anchors directly determines the load-bearing safety of the connection nodes. After the post-installed embedded parts are installed, the anchoring load-bearing capacity must be tested on-site to avoid curtain wall detachment due to anchoring failure.

[0003] The conventional approach is to directly conduct on-site pull-out tests using a pull-out apparatus. Non-destructive testing applies the design load to a certain percentage of samples without causing failure, while destructive testing applies the load until anchorage failure to obtain the ultimate bearing capacity. Non-destructive testing uses displacement under the design load as the pass / fail criterion. When displacement exceeds the limit, sampling is usually expanded based on experience, or destructive testing is switched to. There is a lack of a unified method to quantify displacement anomalies as triggering destructive testing. Destructive testing causes permanent damage to the anchor bolts, so the number of bolts tested should not be excessive. Relying solely on destructive testing is prohibitively expensive and time-consuming; relying solely on non-destructive testing makes it difficult to fully assess the anchorage bearing capacity margin. Ultrasonic testing can reflect some acoustic impedance characteristics of the anchorage section without damaging the anchor bolt, but when used as an independent method, it cannot form a progressive verification chain with subsequent bearing capacity tests.

[0004] Therefore, in actual repair projects, there is a lack of a testing method that organically connects ultrasonic non-destructive screening, non-destructive pull-out testing, and destructive pull-out testing in a risk-progressive order. This makes it difficult to balance testing reliability and economy, and it is also difficult to form a standardized implementation method for handling abnormalities on site. Summary of the Invention

[0005] One object of the present invention is to solve at least the above-mentioned problems and to provide at least the advantages that will be described later.

[0006] Another objective of this invention is to provide a method for the supplementary installation and load-bearing capacity grading verification of post-installed embedded parts in glass curtain walls. This method can automatically connect the non-destructive initial screening of ultrasonic amplitude ratio, non-destructive pull-out test and destructive pull-out test in a risk-progressive order into a unified grading verification process. The displacement deformation threshold is used as the quantitative criterion for triggering destructive testing, avoiding the arbitrariness of expanding sampling based solely on experience.

[0007] To achieve these objectives and other advantages of the present invention, a method for supplementing and verifying the load-bearing capacity of post-installed embedded parts in glass curtain walls is provided, including the use of an ultrasonic testing module, a pull-out testing module and a control module. The ultrasonic testing module includes an ultrasonic probe, which is used to abut against the end face of the chemical anchor and emit ultrasonic pulses into the chemical anchor, and to receive a first reflected signal returned from the end of the chemical anchor and a second reflected signal returned from the threaded section of the chemical anchor. The pull-out detection module includes a pull-out instrument, whose force application unit is used to apply axial pull-out load, and force sensor and displacement sensor respectively measure load value and displacement value in real time. The control module is electrically connected to the two modules and is configured as follows: After the post-installed embedded parts are installed, the ultrasonic detection module is controlled to obtain the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal for each chemical anchor. The post-installed embedded parts corresponding to anchors with ratios exceeding the qualified benchmark range are removed, and those with ratios within the range are retained as qualified post-installed embedded parts in the initial screening. After the initial screening is qualified, the embedded parts are batched according to the same specifications and model. The first sample is randomly selected and a non-destructive pull-out test is carried out on the first sample: graded loading is applied, and the displacement value is recorded when the design load value is reached. Then the loading is continued to 1.0 to 1.3 times the design load value and the load is held for no less than 2 minutes. If the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the inspection batch is deemed qualified; otherwise, a second sample is randomly selected from the remaining post-embedded parts for destructive pull-out testing: graded loading is applied until anchorage failure, the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value is recorded, compared with the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, and the inspection batch is determined to be qualified according to the counting sampling judgment rules.

[0008] This invention employs a non-destructive initial screening method by obtaining the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected ultrasonic signal to the amplitude of the second reflected ultrasonic signal for each chemical anchor. Abnormal individuals with amplitude ratios exceeding the acceptable range are eliminated, and only those that pass the initial screening are retained for subsequent installation. After assembling the initially screened installations, samples are randomly selected for non-destructive pull-out testing. The displacement value under the design load is used as the quantitative criterion; if the displacement exceeds the acceptable displacement threshold, a destructive pull-out test is triggered; otherwise, the batch is deemed acceptable. The destructive pull-out test obtains the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity, and the overall batch is determined to be acceptable according to the counting sampling rules. These three testing methods are automatically linked by the control module in a progressively risk-driven sequence: non-destructive screening, then non-destructive loading, and finally destructive verification, forming a unified hierarchical verification process.

[0009] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: before assembling the pre-screened qualified post-embedded parts into batches of the same specifications and models, for each pre-screened qualified post-embedded part, obtain the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflection signal to the amplitude of the second reflection signal corresponding to all chemical anchors on it, and calculate the coefficient of variation of these ratios; if the coefficient of variation is greater than a preset consistency threshold, then the post-embedded part is removed from the pre-screened qualified post-embedded parts and is not included in the batching of the inspection batch.

[0010] When judging the ultrasonic amplitude ratio of each chemical anchor in the initial screening stage, it can only identify whether the ratio of a single anchor exceeds the qualified benchmark range, but cannot detect significant differences in the anchoring quality between multiple chemical anchors on the same post-installed component. When the anchoring status of each anchor on the same embedded plate is uneven, even if each anchor is judged to be qualified individually, under service load, uneven stiffness distribution may still cause some anchors to be stressed first and fail successively. The coefficient of variation of the amplitude ratio of each anchor on the same post-installed component is used to quantify the uniformity of the group anchoring construction. When the coefficient of variation exceeds the preset consistency threshold, it indicates that the anchoring quality of each anchor in the embedded component is too dispersed, and there is a hidden risk of group anchor stress concentration. Therefore, it is removed from the post-installed components that have passed the initial screening and is not included in the subsequent inspection batch to prevent such hidden components that may still pass the displacement test in non-destructive pull-out but gradually deteriorate during long-term service from entering the bearing capacity test stage.

[0011] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: continuously receive the displacement values ​​measured in real time by the displacement sensor during the load-bearing period of the non-destructive pull-out test on the first sample, obtain the displacement value D1 corresponding to the load-bearing start time t1 and the displacement value D2 corresponding to the load-bearing end time t2, and calculate the displacement change rate V = (D2-D1) / t1 within the time period T = t2-t1. T; Simultaneously, the time period T is divided into the first half T1 and the second half T2, and the displacement change rate V1 of the first half and the displacement change rate V2 of the second half are calculated respectively; If V2>V1 and V2 is greater than the preset creep acceleration threshold, then regardless of whether the displacement value of the post-embedded part under the design load value is not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the post-embedded part is regarded as abnormal, triggering the destructive pull-out test on the remaining post-embedded parts in the same inspection batch; If V2>V1 but V2 is not greater than the creep acceleration threshold, then the post-embedded part is marked as creep non-convergence, and when the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the creep non-convergence state of the post-embedded part is used as one of the conditions for triggering the expansion of non-destructive pull-out sampling.

[0012] During the load-bearing phase of non-destructive pull-out testing, judging solely by whether the instantaneous displacement under the design load exceeds the acceptable displacement threshold cannot detect the gradual instability trend of the anchoring system under continuous load, where displacement slowly increases over time and the creep rate gradually accelerates. During the load-bearing period, the displacement change rate of an anchoring system approaching failure often no longer converges or remains stable over time, but gradually transforms from initial decaying creep to later accelerated creep. Therefore, the load-bearing period is divided into two equal segments, and the displacement change rates of the first and second halves are calculated and compared. When the change rate in the second half is greater than that in the first half and exceeds the preset creep acceleration threshold, it indicates that the anchoring system has entered an unstable creep stage. Even if the cumulative displacement has not yet exceeded the limit, it is considered abnormal and a destructive pull-out test is triggered. When the increase in the change rate in the second half has not yet reached the acceleration threshold, the anchor is marked as being in a creep non-convergence state, serving as one of the triggering conditions for subsequent expanded non-destructive pull-out sampling, thereby identifying the anchoring deterioration trend before the total displacement exceeds the limit.

[0013] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: when the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold and the destructive pull-out test is not triggered, for each post-embedded part in the first sample, obtain the displacement change rate V1 in the first half and the displacement change rate V2 in the second half during the non-destructive pull-out test load period; when V2≤V1, calculate the creep convergence index β = V2 / V1 of the post-embedded part; then calculate the average creep convergence index β of all post-embedded parts in the first sample that satisfy the condition V2≤V1. avg If β avg If the displacement value exceeds the preset convergence threshold, or if there are post-embedded parts marked as creep non-convergence in the first sample, an additional expanded sampling non-destructive pull-out test is performed on the remaining post-embedded parts in the same inspection batch. A third sample with a quantity twice that of the first sample is drawn, and the same graded loading and holding operation as the first sample is performed. The inspection batch is only deemed qualified if the displacement value of all post-embedded parts in the third sample is not greater than the qualified displacement threshold and the destructive pull-out test is not triggered. If the third sample triggers the destructive pull-out test during the inspection process due to displacement value exceeding the limit or accelerated creep under load, the inspection batch is deemed unqualified.

[0014] In practical applications, the entire batch is often deemed acceptable after passing non-destructive pull-out testing. This may lead to the misclassification of high-risk batches (those with displacement values ​​and creep rates that do not meet the criteria but exhibit generally weak creep convergence under load) as high-quality batches. The health of an anchoring system is closely related to the convergence trend of creep under load. For anchors that are becoming stable, the rate of displacement change decreases over time. The ratio of the latter half of the rate of change to the former half reflects the degree of convergence; the closer the ratio is to 1, the more the creep tends towards a constant rate rather than convergence. When the average creep convergence index of the post-installed anchors that meet the convergence criteria in the first sample is high, or when there are individuals in the first sample marked as non-convergent creep, it indicates that the anchoring system in this batch may have micro-defect structures with poor cohesion, resulting in lower-than-expected long-term anchoring reliability. To address this, an additional non-destructive pull-out retest is conducted, with the sample size being twice that of the first sample. Only if the retest results also meet the requirements of displacement compliance and do not trigger destructive testing can the batch be ultimately deemed qualified. This extends the criteria for judgment from "whether it exceeds the standard" to "whether it is stable and convergent" without increasing the cost of destructive testing for low-risk batches.

[0015] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: during the destructive pull-out test, in the process of graded loading, when the load value reaches the design load value, record the displacement value measured by the displacement sensor as a reference displacement D. ref Continue loading in stages until anchorage failure, and record the ultimate tensile strength and the corresponding ultimate displacement D. ult ; Calculate the ductility coefficient μ = D ult / D ref The method of determining whether the inspection batch is qualified according to the counting sampling judgment rule includes: if the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value of the post-embedded part in the second sample is less than the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, or the ductility coefficient μ is less than the preset ductility threshold, then the post-embedded part is counted as a non-conforming product. When the number of non-conforming products in the second sample is greater than or equal to the number of rejections, the inspection batch is determined to be unqualified; otherwise, it is determined to be qualified.

[0016] In destructive pull-out testing, comparing only the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity with the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold fails to eliminate anchorage systems that, while meeting bearing capacity requirements, exhibit brittle pull-out or bolt breakage failure modes. These anchorages lack sufficient deformation capacity and may suddenly fail without warning under overload. By using the ratio of the reference displacement corresponding to the design load value during graded loading to the ultimate displacement at anchorage failure as the ductility coefficient, if the ductility coefficient of a post-installed component in the second sample is lower than the preset ductility threshold, it is considered a non-conforming product regardless of its bearing capacity, and is included in the count sampling judgment along with non-conforming products with insufficient bearing capacity. This superimposes the ductility criterion on top of the bearing capacity criterion, ensuring that the acceptance rules for destructive testing consider both strength and deformation capacity.

[0017] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: before controlling the ultrasonic detection module to acquire the ratio of the first reflected signal amplitude to the second reflected signal amplitude of each chemical anchor, drive the ultrasonic probe to emit a verification pulse into the chemical anchor with preset excitation parameters, and receive the verification reflection signal returned from the end face of the chemical anchor; extract the full width at half maximum (FWHM) W and peak amplitude A of the first echo peak in the time-domain waveform of the verification reflection signal, and calculate the coupling quality factor Q = A / W; and compare the coupling quality factor Q with a preset lower limit value Q for coupling qualification. min The comparison is performed only if Q is not less than Q. min Only then are the amplitudes of the first and second reflected signals acquired in this measurement used to calculate the ratio; if Q is less than Q... min If the measurement fails, the data from that measurement will be discarded and a signal will be sent to prompt the probe to re-engage.

[0018] Ultrasonic amplitude ratio detection relies on the consistency of acoustic coupling between the probe and the end face of the chemical anchor. However, in field operations, insufficient cleanliness of the end face, fluctuations in probe clamping force, or uneven thickness of the couplant layer can all cause additional attenuation of the reflected signal amplitude unrelated to anchoring quality, leading to amplitude ratio distortion. Poor acoustic coupling not only reduces echo amplitude but also broadens the acoustic pulse, resulting in a reduced echo peak value and a blunted waveform. Before formally acquiring the amplitude ratio signal, a calibration pulse is emitted to extract the full width at half maximum (FWHM) and peak amplitude of the first peak of the end face echo. The ratio of these two values ​​is used as the coupling quality factor, comprehensively reflecting the acoustic energy transmission efficiency and dispersion at the coupling interface. When this factor falls below a preset lower limit, it indicates that the coupling state is unacceptable. The measurement data is then discarded, and the probe is prompted to be reconnected, ensuring that only signals with qualified coupling are included in subsequent ratio calculations. This eliminates initial screening errors or missed detections caused by poor acoustic coupling at the input end.

[0019] Preferably, the control module is further configured to: perform spectral analysis on the verification reflection signal or the first reflection signal before obtaining the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal, and extract the peak frequency f in the spectrum. p Given a -6dB bandwidth Δf, calculate the end-face quality index S = f p / Δf; compare the end face quality index S with the preset end face integrity threshold S min Compare them; if S is less than S min If the chemical anchor bolt end face is damaged, the post-installed part will be removed from the initial screening of qualified post-installed parts or marked for re-inspection; only when S is not less than S min Only then is the amplitude data collected in this measurement used to calculate the ratio.

[0020] During the installation of chemical anchors, the end face may suffer damage such as microcracks, dents, and irregular deformation due to impacts or cutting. This type of end face damage does not reflect the construction quality of the anchoring section, but it can cause unpredictable scattering, diffuse reflection, or mode conversion of ultrasonic waves at the end face, resulting in a non-proportional attenuation of the amplitudes of the first and second reflected signals. This distorts the acoustic impedance difference reflected by the amplitude ratio. The ultrasonic echo spectrum formed by an intact metal end face typically has sharp peaks and a narrow bandwidth, while the end face with microcracks or rough deformation damage will selectively attenuate the high-frequency components in the echo, lowering the peak frequency. Simultaneously, multiple reflections and interference effects will broaden the spectrum. Spectral analysis of the verification reflected signal or the first reflected signal is performed to extract the peak frequency and -6dB bandwidth. The ratio of these two values ​​is used as the end face quality index to comprehensively measure the energy concentration and spectral sharpness of the echo. When the index is lower than the preset end face integrity threshold, it is determined that the end face of the chemical anchor is damaged. The corresponding post-installed part is removed from the initial qualified post-installed parts or marked as to be re-inspected. Only when the end face quality index meets the requirements is the amplitude data of this measurement used to calculate the ratio, thereby excluding measurement objects with unreliable data sources due to end face damage, and ensuring the effectiveness of the amplitude ratio criterion.

[0021] Preferably, the control module also verifies the validity of the second reflected signal: after receiving the second reflected signal, it extracts its envelope and identifies the moment of the first zero-crossing point in the envelope as the arrival time t of the thread reflection. r and extract t r Signal energy E within the preset time window before and after r Simultaneously, noise energy E is extracted within the time window prior to the arrival of the second reflected signal. n ; Calculate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the thread reflection r = E r / E n ; will SNR r Compared with the preset lower limit of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) min Comparison, if SNR r Below SNR min If the second reflected signal of the measurement is deemed unreliable, the measurement data is discarded, and the chemical anchor is marked as having failed ultrasonic testing. Furthermore, the control module issues a warning signal, requiring the threaded area of ​​the chemical anchor marked as having failed ultrasonic testing to be cleaned and the probe re-engaged for re-inspection. If the SNR of two consecutive re-inspections is... r Still lower than SNR min If the chemical anchor bolt is not found, the subsequent embedded part will be removed from the initial screening of qualified subsequent embedded parts; only if the SNR... r Not less than SNR min Only then is the amplitude of the second reflected signal measured in that measurement used to calculate the ratio.

[0022] During the ultrasonic testing process, when there are media such as accumulated water, wet mortar, or metal debris between the post-embedded steel plate and the threaded section of the chemical anchor bolt, an accidental sound bridge path will be formed, resulting in the diversion and attenuation of the acoustic wave energy that should originally be reflected back to the probe at the free interface of the thread. This causes the amplitude of the second reflection signal extracted to be abnormally low, and the amplitude ratio calculated therefrom cannot reflect the true anchoring quality, leading to misjudgment in the preliminary screening stage. Under free interface conditions, the threaded section of the anchor bolt should form a clearly distinguishable reflected echo, and its energy is significantly higher than the base noise level. However, the sound bridge short circuit causes the echo energy to be greatly attenuated to near the noise floor. Therefore, after time-frequency localization of the second reflection signal, the signal energy within a preset time window near the arrival time of the thread reflection is extracted, and at the same time, the noise segment energy before the arrival of the reflection signal is intercepted. The ratio of the two is used as the signal-to-noise ratio of the thread reflection. When the signal-to-noise ratio is lower than the preset lower limit, it indicates that the thread reflection signal has been submerged by noise or does not meet the effective measurement conditions. This data is discarded and the chemical anchor bolt is marked as ineffective in the test, prompting cleaning of the thread area and repositioning the probe for re-inspection. If the signal-to-noise ratio requirement is still not met after two consecutive re-inspections, the post-embedded part where the chemical anchor bolt is located is removed from the post-embedded parts that passed the preliminary screening. Only when the signal-to-noise ratio meets the standard, the amplitude of its second reflection signal is used for ratio calculation, complementing the reliability verification link of the signal path that cannot be covered by the coupling quality and end face quality verification from the perspective of signal credibility.

[0023] The present invention at least includes the following beneficial effects: Through the non-destructive preliminary screening of the ultrasonic amplitude ratio and non-destructive pull-out test, the present invention can complete the qualified determination in most batches. Only batches with excessive displacement or abnormal creep are automatically triggered for destructive pull-out tests, so that the destructive test is only used limitedly for batches with higher risks. While reducing the project cost and construction period, it can still ensure the verification reliability of the anchoring bearing capacity. Using whether the displacement value under the design load exceeds the qualified displacement threshold as the quantitative criterion for triggering the destructive pull-out test, replacing the practice of expanding sampling solely based on experience on site, there is a clear and reproducible connection method between the three inspection levels, reducing the arbitrariness of human judgment and improving the standardization degree of the inspection process. By introducing a comparison mechanism for the displacement change rates in the first and second half of the holding stage in the non-destructive pull-out test, the creep acceleration trend of the anchoring system can be captured before the cumulative displacement exceeds the standard, realizing early identification of potential progressive anchoring failure hazards and avoiding misjudging an anchor that has become unstable during creep as qualified during the holding period. By superimposing a ductility coefficient criterion on the bearing capacity criterion of the destructive pull-out test, taking into account the strength and deformation capacity of the anchoring node, post-embedded parts with qualified bearing capacity but brittle failure modes can be excluded, making the determination content of the final acceptance more complete.

[0024] Other advantages, objectives and features of the present invention will become apparent in part from the following description, and in part from those skilled in the art through study and practice of the invention. Detailed Implementation

[0025] The present invention will now be described in further detail so that those skilled in the art can implement it based on the description.

[0026] It should be understood that terms such as “having,” “comprising,” and “including” as used herein do not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other elements or combinations thereof.

[0027] This invention discloses a method for the installation and load-bearing capacity grading verification of post-installed embedded parts in glass curtain walls, which includes an ultrasonic testing module, a pull-out testing module, and a control module. The ultrasonic detection module includes an ultrasonic probe, which is used to abut against the end face of the chemical anchor and emit ultrasonic pulses into the chemical anchor, and to receive a first reflected signal returned from the end of the chemical anchor and a second reflected signal returned from the threaded section of the chemical anchor. The pull-out detection module includes a pull-out instrument, whose force application unit is used to apply axial pull-out load, and force sensor and displacement sensor respectively measure load value and displacement value in real time. The control module is electrically connected to the two modules and is configured as follows: After the post-installed embedded parts are installed, the ultrasonic detection module is controlled to obtain the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal for each chemical anchor. The post-installed embedded parts corresponding to anchors with ratios exceeding the qualified benchmark range are removed, and those with ratios within the range are retained as qualified post-installed embedded parts in the initial screening. After the initial screening is qualified, the embedded parts are batched according to the same specifications and model. The first sample is randomly selected and a non-destructive pull-out test is carried out on the first sample: graded loading is applied, and the displacement value is recorded when the design load value is reached. Then the loading is continued to 1.0 to 1.3 times the design load value and the load is held for no less than 2 minutes. If the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the inspection batch is deemed qualified; otherwise, a second sample is randomly selected from the remaining post-embedded parts for destructive pull-out testing: graded loading is applied until anchorage failure, the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value is recorded, compared with the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, and the inspection batch is determined to be qualified according to the counting sampling judgment rules.

[0028] In one embodiment, the system used in the method for supplementing and verifying the load-bearing capacity of the post-installed embedded parts of the glass curtain wall includes an ultrasonic testing module, a pull-out testing module, and an industrial controller as a control module. The core component of the ultrasonic testing module can be a contact-type longitudinal wave straight probe with a center frequency of 2.5MHz and a crystal diameter of 14mm. This probe is used to abut against the end face of the chemical anchor, emitting pulsed ultrasonic waves into the anchor and receiving the first reflected signal returned from the anchor end face and the second reflected signal returned from the threaded section. The core of the pull-out testing module is a through-hole pull-out device, whose force application unit can be a hydraulic cylinder. The pull-out device integrates a force sensor and a displacement sensor. The force sensor's range can be selected from 0 to 100kN with an accuracy class of not less than 0.5, and the displacement sensor's range can be selected from 0 to 10mm with a resolution of not less than 0.001mm, used to synchronously acquire load and displacement values ​​in real time during the loading process. The control module can be an embedded industrial computer with a data acquisition card, which is electrically connected to the control interfaces of the ultrasonic flaw detector and the pull-out tester via signal cables. It is responsible for driving the detection, acquiring data, and executing preset logic criteria. Before on-site testing, the working surface of the ultrasonic probe needs to be stably coupled to the end face of the anchor bolt using a coupling agent. The through-hole cylinder of the pull-out tester is then fitted onto the anchor bolt thread and secured with a lock nut, ensuring that the force application axis coincides with the anchor bolt axis.

[0029] During operation, after all post-installed components have been drilled, cleaned, and chemically anchored, and the specified curing age has been reached, the testing process begins. The control module first initiates the ultrasonic screening program, controlling the ultrasonic probe's pulse generator to emit electrical pulses with a preset excitation voltage and pulse width. This excites the probe chip to generate ultrasonic pulses that penetrate the anchor bolt. The probe then captures two echo signals reflected from the two acoustic impedance changing interfaces at the anchor bolt end face and the threaded section. For each chemically anchored bolt, the program extracts the amplitude values ​​of the first and second reflected signals from the acquired time-domain waveforms and calculates their ratio. The acceptable benchmark range can be determined based on ±15% of the reference ratio calibrated by the laboratory on standard anchoring specimens. For example, if the calibrated reference ratio is 2.0, the acceptable benchmark range is 1.7 to 2.3. The control module automatically removes all anchor bolts with ratios exceeding this range from the batch to be inspected, retaining only those anchor bolts whose ratios all fall within this range, defining them as initially qualified anchor bolts. Alternatively, the control module can be configured to allow a single anchor bolt with an out-of-range ratio to be re-inspected. During re-inspection, the end face is cleaned again, and the probe is brought into contact with the bolt before measurement. If the re-inspection ratio falls within the acceptable benchmark range, the anchor bolt and its corresponding anchor bolt can still be retained as initially qualified. This non-destructive screening step does not require the anchor bolt to bear any load, thus filtering out individuals with significant anchoring defects before the formal load-bearing capacity test.

[0030] Subsequently, the post-installed embedded parts that passed the initial screening were grouped into an inspection batch according to the same anchor bolt specifications, embedded plate models, and construction conditions. A specified number of first samples were randomly selected from this batch. The sample size can be determined by referring to the current industry standards for the sampling ratio of on-site inspection of anchor bearing capacity. For example, 5% of the total number of embedded parts in the batch, but not less than 3 pieces, can be selected as the first sample. Each post-installed embedded part in the first sample was subjected to a non-destructive pull-out test: the control module applied axial tensile load in stages according to the "load control" mode. The loading speed can be set to 5 kN per minute. Each load increment is 20% of the design load value. At the instant the design load value is reached, the displacement value measured by the displacement sensor is locked and recorded. Then, the loading is continued in stages until it reaches 1.2 times the design load value. After the load stabilizes, the load holding stage begins, and the holding time is set to 2 minutes. If the design load displacement values ​​recorded for all post-installed anchors in the first sample during this process are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold (for example, for M12 chemical anchors, this threshold can be set to 0.8 mm), the control module directly determines that the batch is qualified and generates a test report. If the displacement value of any anchor exceeds the threshold, the judgment process switches to the destructive pull-out test stage: a second sample is randomly selected from the remaining anchors in the batch, and the anchors in the second sample are subjected to destructive pull-out testing. The same loading is applied in stages until the anchor is pulled out, the concrete cone is destroyed, or the bolt steel is broken. The recorded peak load is the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity. The ultimate bearing capacity of each tested anchor is compared with the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold (for example, it can be set to 2.0 times the design load value or the characteristic resistance of the anchor product identification), and the batch of post-installed anchors is determined to be qualified using the counting sampling rule.

[0031] This implementation method automates and links three inspection levels with different damage levels and inspection rigor through a control module: ultrasonic initial screening, non-destructive pull-out testing, and destructive pull-out testing, forming a logically closed-loop hierarchical verification process. Using a clearly defined displacement acceptance threshold as the trigger condition, the previously experience-dependent processes of expanded sampling or transitioning to destructive testing are now parametrically triggered, eliminating ambiguities in judgment. Without compromising the reliability of anchorage safety assessment, this ensures that most qualified post-installed anchors only require non-destructive pull-out testing to pass acceptance, thereby minimizing damage to the engineering structure and reducing overall testing costs.

[0032] Building upon the above implementation method, another implementation method further improves upon the additional screening for the uniformity of anchorage quality in a group of anchors. After the control module completes the acquisition of ultrasonic amplitude ratios for all chemical anchors and determines them as initially qualified post-installed parts, but before entering the batching process according to the same specifications and model, it performs a group anchor uniformity check on each post-installed part in the batch. At this time, the contact longitudinal wave straight probe in the ultrasonic testing module has completed the coupling and signal acquisition of each anchor, and the ratio of the first reflected signal amplitude to the second reflected signal amplitude of each anchor has been stored in the data buffer of the control module. The control module retrieves the amplitude ratios of all chemical anchors belonging to the same post-installed part from this buffer, for example, the four ratios corresponding to a four-hole embedded plate, and calls the numerical statistics program to calculate the coefficient of variation of these ratios, that is, the standard deviation of the ratio divided by the average value. The preset consistency threshold can be determined based on calibration tests conducted in the laboratory under the same batch of anchors and the same substrate conditions. For example, it can be set to 0.15. When the coefficient of variation is greater than 0.15, it indicates that the anchoring stiffness of each anchor on the embedded part is significantly different, and there is a risk that individual anchors may be overloaded in the early stage under the stress state of the group anchors. The control module directly removes the post-installed embedded part from the initial screening qualified list and does not include it in the batching and sampling scope of subsequent inspection batches. Only when the coefficient of variation of all anchor ratios is not greater than 0.15 can the post-installed embedded part enter the batching stage. The control module will classify it into the corresponding inspection batch according to its specifications and model, and wait for the first sample to be drawn for non-destructive pull-out test. This screening step uses the sensitivity of ultrasonic reflection amplitude ratio to micro-defects in the anchoring section. Without adding extra equipment and procedures, it extracts the dispersion index reflecting the uniformity of group anchor construction from the amplitude ratio data, and intercepts potential hidden dangers such as single anchor ratio qualified but insufficient group anchor consistency in advance.

[0033] In another implementation, during the non-destructive pull-out test load-bearing stage of the above system, a segmented rate of change analysis of the displacement time history curve is added. At this time, the displacement sensor of the pull-out instrument is already mounted on the anchor bolt along with the hydraulic cylinder, with the measuring point located at the end face of the exposed section of the anchor bolt. The displacement sensor continuously uploads real-time displacement data to the control module via a signal cable. The control module has preset creep acceleration thresholds and qualified displacement thresholds. Once the load-bearing timer begins, the control module continuously receives real-time displacement values ​​from the displacement sensor at a sampling rate of no less than once per second, and automatically marks the displacement value D1 corresponding to the load-bearing start time t1 and the displacement value D2 corresponding to the load-bearing end time t2. The control module first calculates the overall displacement rate of change for the entire load-bearing period using the formula V = (D2 - D1) / (t2 - t1), which serves as a background reference. Simultaneously, the control module divides the total load-bearing duration T = t2 - t1 into a first half T1 and a second half T2, and then calculates the displacement rate of change V1 for the first half and the displacement rate of change V2 for the second half. The essence of this segmented calculation is to observe the rate of displacement development and determine whether the deformation of the anchoring system under continuous load is converging or developing.

[0034] After obtaining V1 and V2, the control module executes the following comparison logic. If V2 is greater than V1, it indicates that the displacement growth rate is accelerating. V2 is then further compared with a preset creep acceleration threshold. This threshold can be determined based on previous laboratory tests of graded load holding tests on chemical anchors of the same specification. For example, for M12 anchors under standard load stress levels, this threshold can be set to 0.003 mm / min. When V2 exceeds this threshold, it means that irreversible damage evolution is occurring at the anchorage interface or inside the adhesive, and the anchorage system has entered an unstable creep stage. At this point, regardless of whether the total displacement value D2 of the embedded part at the end of the load holding period still does not exceed the acceptable displacement threshold, the control module immediately marks the embedded part as abnormal, terminates the current non-destructive pull-out inspection process, and automatically triggers an instruction to perform a destructive pull-out inspection on the remaining embedded parts in the same inspection batch. If V2 is greater than V1, but the value of V2 has not exceeded 0.003 mm / min, it indicates that although the displacement rate tends to increase, the degree is still minor. The control module then marks the post-embedded part as being in a "creep non-convergence" state. Provided that the final displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, this marked state is stored in the control module's judgment flag area. This serves as one of the additional conditions for triggering expanded non-destructive pull-out sampling during subsequent creep convergence secondary evaluations. This approach, by capturing the magnitude and direction of the displacement change rate during the load-bearing process, avoids the lag caused by focusing only on the final displacement value, shifting the risk identification time point from "after displacement exceeds the limit" to "at the beginning of creep acceleration."

[0035] In existing non-destructive pull-out test qualification procedures, if the displacement values ​​of all post-installed anchors in the first sample do not exceed the qualified displacement threshold at the end of the load holding period, and no abnormalities triggering destructive testing occur, the entire inspection batch is usually directly deemed qualified and released. This judgment logic assumes that as long as the displacement and creep rate do not touch the set warning red line, all anchors in the batch have the same long-term anchoring reliability. However, although the individual indicators of some batches of anchoring systems do not exceed the standards, the batch fluctuations caused by factors such as the uniformity of colloid mixing and the cleanliness of hole cleaning during construction may lead to generally weaker load-bearing creep convergence of the entire batch of anchors. If such batches, which fall into a gray area, are accepted indiscriminately with high-quality batches, the problem of anchoring stiffness attenuation may gradually emerge during their service life.

[0036] To address the aforementioned issues, another embodiment of the present invention, assuming that all non-destructive pull-out tests of the first sample are completed without triggering destructive tests, utilizes a control module to perform secondary analysis and batch risk assessment on the load-bearing creep data of the first sample. At this point, the displacement change rates V1 and V2 of all inspected post-embedded parts in the first and second halves of the load-bearing period are already stored within the control module. The control module iterates through the V1 and V2 value pairs of each post-embedded part in the first sample, first selecting individuals where V2 ≤ V1, i.e., those embedded parts whose displacement rate remains convergent or at least does not increase during the load-bearing period. For these embedded parts that meet the convergence condition, the control module calculates their creep convergence index β one by one using β = V2 / V1. This index reflects the attenuation ratio of the creep rate in the second half of the load-bearing period relative to the first half; the closer β is to 1, the weaker the degree to which the creep rate tends towards uniform convergence. The preset convergence threshold can be set based on the results of benchmark creep tests conducted in the laboratory on anchors of the same specification under standard conditions. For example, a threshold of 0.6 means that the creep rate of a high-quality anchor typically decreases to less than 60% of that in the first half of the load-bearing period. If the control module calculates the average β value of this batch of convergent embedded parts... avg A value greater than 0.6 indicates that the overall creep convergence of this batch is relatively weak.

[0037] In addition, the control module will check whether any individual post-embedded components in the first sample were marked as "creep non-convergence" during the load-bearing analysis phase, i.e., individuals where V2>V1 but the acceleration threshold has not yet been triggered. Once β appears... avgIf either the value is greater than the convergence threshold or there is a post-embedded part with a creep non-convergence mark in the first sample, the control module determines that this inspection batch belongs to a high-risk batch and additional non-destructive pull-out re-inspection with expanded sampling is required. The control module then issues an instruction to randomly select a third sample from the remaining un-pulled post-embedded parts in this inspection batch, and the number of samples selected is set to twice the amount of the first sample. For example, when the first sample is 3 pieces, 6 pieces are selected for the third sample. The pull-out operations of these third samples are performed by the pull-out instrument with the same grading loading procedure and holding load system as the first sample. After reaching 1.2 times the design load value, hold the load for 2 minutes. The control module synchronously monitors the displacement values and creep characteristics of the third sample. Only when the displacement values of all the post-embedded parts in the third sample under the design load are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold and no creep acceleration occurs during the entire holding process to trigger a destructive test, will this inspection batch be finally determined to be qualified. If any case of displacement exceeding the limit or creep acceleration during the holding load occurs in the third sample during the inspection, the control module determines that this inspection batch is unqualified, no further destructive re-inspection will be added, and an unqualified conclusion will be output. This mechanism extends the one-dimensional logic of determining batch qualification from whether a single piece exceeds the standard to a two-dimensional assessment of the creep convergence trend of the entire batch. Without additional damage to the embedded parts of the qualified batch, it can automatically identify the potential hazards of the entire batch that are currently not exceeding the limit but have questionable long-term anchoring stability.

[0038] In another embodiment of the present invention, a calculation and screening mechanism for the ductility coefficient is introduced in the loading and determination link of the destructive pull-out test. When the inspection process is triggered into the destructive pull-out test stage due to the displacement of the first sample exceeding the limit, or creep acceleration during the holding load, or the failure of the expanded sampling, the force application unit of the pull-out instrument has been sleeved on the anchor bolts of each post-embedded part in the second sample according to the foregoing embodiment. The force sensor and the displacement sensor are in a real-time acquisition state and send the data to the control module synchronously. The control module drives the hydraulic cylinder to gradually apply axial tension according to the preset grading loading procedure, and the loading step difference remains the same as that in the non-destructive pull-out test stage. For example, each level is 20% of the design load value. When the load value reaches the design load value, the control module automatically reads and locks the displacement value measured by the displacement sensor at this moment and records it as the reference displacement D ref . This value reflects the immediate deformation response of the anchoring system under the design horizontal load and is the reference point for subsequent ductility evaluation.

[0039] Continue to load in grades until the anchoring system fails. The failure form may be that the chemical anchor bolt is pulled out, the substrate concrete cone is damaged, or the anchor bolt screw is broken. At this time, the force sensor detects that the load value drops sharply. The control module captures this turning point and records the peak load, which is the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value, and simultaneously reads the corresponding ultimate displacement value D ult . The control module then calculates the ductility coefficient μ of this post-embedded part = Dult / D ref This ratio reflects the deformation reserve capacity of the anchoring system from the design load level to the ultimate failure state. A higher ductility coefficient indicates that the anchoring system provides a more adequate deformation warning before failure. The preset ductility threshold can be determined according to relevant anchoring technical standards or tests based on the anchor product type and substrate conditions. For example, when using chemical anchors on concrete substrates, this threshold can be 3.0. The control module compares μ with 3.0. If μ is less than 3.0, regardless of whether the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity of the post-installed anchor is greater than the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, it is counted as a non-conforming item. After completing the destructive pull-out tests on all post-installed anchors in the second sample, the control module summarizes the total number of anchors with substandard bearing capacity and ductility. According to the preset counting sampling judgment rules, when the number of non-conforming items is greater than or equal to the rejection number corresponding to the sample size, the entire inspection batch is judged as non-conforming; otherwise, it is judged as conforming. By superimposing the ductility criterion on the bearing capacity criterion, the acceptance conclusion of the destructive test not only reflects whether the anchoring node can withstand the specified load, but also reflects whether it has sufficient deformation capacity and predictable failure mode when it is close to failure.

[0040] In another embodiment of the invention, a coupling quality self-verification step is added before the control module formally acquires the first and second reflection signals used for ratio calculation. At this time, the working surface of the ultrasonic probe is contacted with the exposed end face of the chemical anchor bolt via a coupling agent. The probe is connected to an ultrasonic flaw detector via a signal cable, and the flaw detector is controlled by the control module. The control module first drives the pulse generator of the ultrasonic probe to emit a verification pulse with preset excitation parameters. The excitation parameters can be set the same as those for subsequent formal measurement pulses, for example, an excitation voltage of 300V and a pulse width of 100ns, to ensure that the acoustic beam characteristics under verification conditions are consistent with the measurement state. The probe receives the verification reflection signal returned from the same end face and transmits its time-domain waveform data to the control module.

[0041] The control module's built-in signal processing program automatically identifies and extracts the first echo peak from the time-domain waveform of the reflected signal, and extracts the full width at half maximum (FWHM) W and peak amplitude A of the peak. The FWHM W can be calculated by the time interval between the peak's two sides decreasing to 50% of its peak value, while the peak amplitude A is the voltage amplitude of the peak relative to the neutral line. Both can be obtained through the waveform analysis function of a digital oscilloscope module or acquisition card. The control module then calculates the coupling quality factor Q = A / W. This factor comprehensively reflects the influence of the coupling interface on the sound energy transmission efficiency; the worse the coupling, the lower the amplitude A and the more significant the pulse broadening, resulting in a smaller Q value. A preset lower limit for acceptable coupling is set. minThe lower quantile of the Q-value distribution measured under clean end face and standard clamping force conditions using the same probe can be used, for example, 0.5V / μs. When Q is not less than 0.5V / μs, the control module determines that the coupling state is qualified and allows the amplitudes of the first and second reflected signals obtained from subsequent formal measurement pulses to be used for amplitude ratio calculation. When Q is less than 0.5V / μs, it indicates that the acoustic coupling conditions of the probe contact do not meet the reliability requirements. The control module discards all data from this measurement and simultaneously issues a text or audio-visual prompt to the operator via the human-machine interface: "Probe coupling is poor, please re-contact." After receiving the prompt, the operator can clean the end face, add coupling agent, or adjust the probe clamping angle before re-contacting. The control module then drives the verification pulse again and repeats the above evaluation process until the coupling quality factor meets the standard before automatically entering the formal ratio measurement program. This self-verification step ensures that the signal used for amplitude ratio judgment each time comes from a properly coupled acoustic channel, eliminating signal distortion caused by random factors at the operational level from the source.

[0042] In another embodiment of the invention, a spectrum analysis verification step for the end-face quality is added before the control module obtains the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal. At this point, the ultrasonic probe has completed the probe contact qualification confirmation according to the aforementioned coupling quality verification process, and the probe working surface is stably coupled to the end face of the chemical anchor bolt via a coupling agent. The ultrasonic flaw detector is controlled by the control module. The control module calls the spectrum analysis program to perform a fast Fourier transform on the verification reflected signal to obtain its spectrum distribution. The program automatically locates the peak frequency f from the spectrum. p This refers to the frequency value corresponding to the point of maximum amplitude in the spectrum, and simultaneously calculating the bandwidth Δf where the spectral amplitude drops 6dB from the peak. The control module then uses the formula S = f p / Δf calculates the end-face quality index, which comprehensively measures the concentration of echo energy near the dominant frequency. The better the end-face, the sharper the echo spectrum is usually. p Stable with a narrow Δf value and a relatively large S value; when there is damage at the end face, the high-frequency components are attenuated due to scattering, f p As the signal shifts downwards, the bandwidth Δf widens due to multiple reflections and interference, and the S value decreases accordingly.

[0043] Preset end face integrity threshold S minThe S-value can be determined based on the calibration test results of chemical anchors of the same batch and specification under intact end-face conditions, for example, by taking 1.2. The control module compares the calculated S-value with 1.2. If S is less than 1.2, it is determined that there is significant damage to the end face of the chemical anchor, which may cause distortion of subsequent amplitude ratio data. Based on this, the control module removes the post-embedded part containing the chemical anchor from the list of post-embedded parts that passed the initial screening, or marks it as "end face to be re-inspected" in the system interface, prompting the operator to grind and smooth the anchor end face of the embedded part before re-inspection. If S is not less than 1.2, it indicates that the acoustic incident conditions of the end face meet the measurement requirements, and the control module releases the amplitude of the first and second reflected signals collected in this measurement for use in the subsequent amplitude ratio calculation program. This spectral analysis step, without adding additional detection hardware, uses software algorithms to quantitatively screen the quality of the ultrasonic incident interface, ensuring that the data entering the amplitude ratio criterion stage all come from anchors with intact end faces, thus guaranteeing the effectiveness of the initial screening judgment from the data source level.

[0044] In another embodiment of the present invention, after the control module completes the coupling quality verification and end-face quality verification, and before the amplitude of the second reflected signal is formally used for ratio calculation, an additional step is added to verify the effectiveness of the signal-to-noise ratio of the second reflected signal itself. At this time, the ultrasonic probe has been stably coupled to the anchor bolt end face and has emitted a verification pulse, and the ultrasonic flaw detector has transmitted the received complete time-domain signal waveform to the control module. The control module calls the envelope extraction program, uses Hilbert transform or full-wave rectification plus low-pass filtering to obtain the envelope curve of the signal, and identifies the position of the first zero crossing point on the envelope. This moment is the initial arrival time t of the thread reflection wave packet. r The control module uses t r Based on the baseline, t is truncated. r A preset time window can be set before and after, for example, t. r The first 0.5 microseconds to t r The last 2.0 microseconds are used as the signal window. The square integral of the envelope amplitude within this time window is calculated to obtain the thread reflection signal energy E. r Meanwhile, the control module intercepts a time window containing only background noise before the second reflected signal arrives; for example, it can select a segment from 0.5 microseconds to 2.0 microseconds after the end of the transmitted pulse, and calculates the noise energy E in the same way. n The control module is calculated according to the formula SNR. r = E r / E n Calculate the signal-to-noise ratio of the thread reflection, which directly reflects the prominence of the thread reflection echo relative to the substrate noise.

[0045] Preset lower limit of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) minThe SNR can be determined based on statistical values ​​measured in the laboratory on standard anchorage specimens confirming the absence of threaded acoustic bridges. For example, a value of 20 can be used, meaning the energy of the threaded reflection signal must be at least 20 times the noise energy. The control module will calculate the SNR. r Compare with 20. If SNR r A value not less than 20 indicates that the thread reflection signal is clearly identifiable and meets the conditions for effective measurement. The control module then releases the amplitude of the second reflection signal from this measurement to the subsequent amplitude ratio calculation program. If the SNR... r If the SNR is below 20, the control module determines that the second reflected signal of this measurement is unreliable, discards all data obtained from this measurement, and marks the chemical anchor as "invalid ultrasonic test" in the system. Subsequently, the control module sends a prompt signal to the operator via the human-machine interface, requiring the threaded area of ​​the chemical anchor to be cleaned and the probe re-engaged for re-inspection. After checking and removing accumulated water, laitance, or debris from the contact area between the threaded section and the embedded plate, the operator re-measures according to the aforementioned coupling quality verification and the requirements of this step. If the SNR of the re-inspection result is... r If the SNR still does not reach 20, the control module will prompt for a retest, but the total number of retests is limited to two. When the SNR after two consecutive retests is... r When all values ​​are below 20, the control module determines that the attenuation of the thread reflection signal is not due to accidental coupling fluctuations, but rather to a persistent acoustic bridge short circuit or other structural signal path defects. Consequently, the post-embedded part containing the chemical anchor is removed from the initial qualified post-embedded part list and will no longer be included in subsequent batching and pull-out inspection processes. This signal-to-noise ratio verification step, without adding additional testing hardware, confirms the authenticity and effective measurement conditions of the thread reflection echo from a signal reliability perspective, thus forming a complete signal quality closed-loop guarantee through verification of coupling quality, end-face quality, and thread signal path.

[0046] Example 1 In a renovation project of an existing glass curtain wall of a high-rise building, a batch of post-installed embedded parts need to be added to the concrete structural beams. The concrete substrate strength grade is C30, the anchoring depth is 110mm, the embedded plate specifications are 300mm×200mm×12mm, each embedded plate is equipped with 4 M12 specification chemical anchors, the anchors are 5.8 grade carbon steel bolts, the anchoring adhesive is modified epoxy resin-based chemical anchoring adhesive, the design load value is 12kN, and the long-term anchoring reliability requirements must be met within the design service life.

[0047] Test steps: After completing the drilling, hole cleaning, and chemical anchoring of all post-installed components and reaching the 72-hour curing period specified in the product manual, testing was conducted according to the method of this invention at an ambient temperature of 15℃ to 25℃. The ultrasonic testing module used a contact longitudinal wave straight probe with a center frequency of 2.5MHz and a crystal diameter of 14mm. The pull-out testing module used a through-type pull-out tester with a range of 0 to 100kN and an accuracy of 0.5. The displacement sensor had a range of 0 to 10mm and a resolution of 0.001mm. The control module used an embedded industrial computer with a data acquisition card.

[0048] The initial ultrasonic screening stage is performed first. For each chemical anchor, the probe is placed against the exposed end face of the anchor via a coupling agent. The control module transmits a verification pulse with an excitation voltage of 300V and a pulse width of 100ns, and receives the verification reflection signal returned from the end face. The signal processing program extracts the full width at half maximum (FWHM) W and peak amplitude A of the first echo peak from the time-domain waveform and calculates the coupling quality factor Q = A / W, comparing it with the lower limit of acceptable coupling of 0.5V / μs. Simultaneously, a fast Fourier transform is performed on the verification reflection signal to obtain the spectral distribution and extract the peak frequency f. p And -6dB bandwidth Δf and calculate end-face quality index S=f p / Δf is compared with the end-face integrity threshold of 1.2; the envelope of the second reflection signal returned by the threaded section is extracted and the thread reflection signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is calculated. r The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is compared with a lower limit of 20. If any of the three checks fails, a retest is conducted. If two consecutive retests fail, the corresponding post-embedded component is removed. After passing the checks, the control module formally acquires the amplitudes of the first and second reflected signals and calculates their ratio. Using the reference ratio of 2.0 calibrated in the laboratory on standard anchoring specimens of the same specification chemical anchors and C30 concrete substrates as the benchmark, the acceptable benchmark range is determined to be 1.7 to 2.3. Post-embedded components corresponding to anchors with ratios exceeding this range are directly removed, and all anchors with ratios within the range are retained as initially qualified post-embedded components. In this batch of tests, a total of 3 post-embedded components were removed because their amplitude ratios exceeded the range. In the signal verification stage, all anchors passed the coupling quality, end face quality, and thread SNR checks.

[0049] Subsequently, the uniformity of the anchorage was checked for each initially qualified embedded part. The control module retrieved the amplitude ratio of the four anchors on the same embedded part and calculated the coefficient of variation. The preset consistency threshold was 0.15. In this batch of tests, the amplitude ratios of the four anchors of one embedded part were 1.9, 2.1, 2.0, and 1.8, with a coefficient of variation of approximately 0.06, which did not exceed 0.15, and it was retained. The amplitude ratios of the four anchors of another embedded part were 2.3, 1.7, 2.3, and 1.7, with a coefficient of variation of approximately 0.17, which exceeded 0.15, and this embedded part was removed from the list of initially qualified embedded parts.

[0050] The pre-screened and qualified embedded parts were batched according to the same specifications and model. This batch yielded 60 qualified embedded parts, and 3 parts were randomly selected as the first sample at a 5% sampling ratio. A non-destructive pull-out test was performed on the first sample: the hydraulic cylinder of the pull-out apparatus was mounted on the anchor bolt rod and secured with a locking nut. Loading was applied in stages at a rate of 5 kN per minute, with each increment being 20% ​​of the design load value of 12 kN, i.e., 2.4 kN. When 12 kN was reached, the load was locked and the displacement value was recorded. Loading continued until 1.2 times the design load value, i.e., 14.4 kN, at which point the load was held for 2 minutes. The displacement sensor continuously uploaded real-time displacement values ​​at a sampling rate of once per second. The displacement values ​​of the three tested embedded parts under the design load of 12 kN were 0.42 mm, 0.51 mm, and 0.47 mm, respectively, all of which were less than the qualified displacement threshold of 0.8 mm for M12 anchor bolts.

[0051] During the load holding period, the control module synchronously performed segmented creep analysis. The 2-minute load holding time was divided into two 1-minute intervals, and the displacement change rates V1 and V2 for the first and second halves were calculated respectively. The V1 values ​​for the three embedded parts were 0.006 mm / min, 0.007 mm / min, and 0.006 mm / min, respectively, and the V2 values ​​were 0.002 mm / min, 0.003 mm / min, and 0.002 mm / min, respectively. V2 was not greater than V1, and V2 was not greater than the creep acceleration threshold of 0.003 mm / min (no cases of exceeding the threshold occurred). No destructive pull-out test was triggered, and no creep non-convergence marker appeared.

[0052] After the load holding period ended, the control module performed a secondary evaluation of the creep convergence of the first sample. All three embedded parts satisfied the condition V2≤V1, and the creep convergence indices β were calculated respectively, yielding results of 0.38, 0.42, and 0.35, with an average value of β. avg The value was 0.38, which is lower than the convergence threshold of 0.6, and there were no creep non-convergence markers in the first sample, so expanded sampling and re-inspection were not triggered. Based on this, the control module determined that the inspection batch was qualified and generated an inspection report.

[0053] Of the 60 post-installed embedded parts in this batch, 3 were removed during the initial ultrasonic screening due to excessive amplitude ratios, and 1 was removed during the group anchor uniformity verification due to excessive coefficient of variation. A total of 56 parts were ultimately included in the inspection batch. The first sample of 3 embedded parts met all requirements for non-destructive pull-out tests, and creep convergence assessment confirmed that the anchoring system of this batch exhibited good load-bearing creep convergence. This batch of post-installed embedded parts was determined to be qualified for load-bearing capacity testing using the method of this invention and can be used for subsequent curtain wall keel installation.

[0054] If the following situations occur in subsequent batches of inspections, the inspection process will automatically switch to the corresponding stage according to the grading mechanism: If the displacement value of a certain embedded part in the first sample under the design load exceeds 0.8mm, or the displacement change rate V2 in the second half of the load-bearing period is greater than the displacement change rate V1 in the first half of the load-bearing period and V2 is greater than the creep acceleration threshold of 0.003mm / min, then a destructive pull-out test will be triggered on the remaining embedded parts; In the destructive pull-out test, in addition to checking whether the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity has reached the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, it is also necessary to use the reference displacement D corresponding to the design load of 12kN. ref With limit displacement D ult Calculate the ductility coefficient μ, with a ductility threshold of 3.0. If the ultimate bearing capacity of a certain post-embedded part is not up to standard or μ is less than 3.0, it is considered a non-conforming product. When the number of non-conforming products in the second sample reaches or exceeds the rejection number specified in the counting sampling plan, the entire inspection batch is deemed non-conforming.

[0055] Although the embodiments of the present invention have been disclosed above, they are not limited to the applications listed in the specification and embodiments. They can be applied to various fields suitable for the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other modifications can be easily made. Therefore, without departing from the general concept defined by the claims and their equivalents, the present invention is not limited to the specific details.

Claims

1. A method for supplementing and verifying the carrying capacity of a glass curtain wall backset embedded part, characterized in that: This includes the use of an ultrasonic testing module, a pull-out testing module, and a control module; The ultrasonic detection module includes an ultrasonic probe, which is used to abut against the end face of the chemical anchor and emit ultrasonic pulses into the chemical anchor, and to receive a first reflected signal returned from the end of the chemical anchor and a second reflected signal returned from the threaded section of the chemical anchor. The pull-out detection module includes a pull-out instrument, whose force application unit is used to apply axial pull-out load, and force sensor and displacement sensor respectively measure load value and displacement value in real time. The control module is electrically connected to the two modules and is configured as follows: After the post-installed embedded parts are installed, the ultrasonic detection module is controlled to obtain the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal for each chemical anchor. The post-installed embedded parts corresponding to anchors with ratios exceeding the qualified benchmark range are removed, and those with ratios within the range are retained as qualified post-installed embedded parts in the initial screening. After the initial screening is qualified, the embedded parts are batched according to the same specifications and model. The first sample is randomly selected and a non-destructive pull-out test is carried out on the first sample: graded loading is applied, and the displacement value is recorded when the design load value is reached. Then the loading is continued to 1.0 to 1.3 times the design load value and the load is held for no less than 2 minutes. If the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, then the inspection batch is deemed qualified. Otherwise, a second sample is randomly selected from the remaining post-embedded parts for destructive pull-out testing: graded loading is applied until anchorage failure, the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value is recorded, compared with the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, and the batch is judged as qualified according to the counting sampling judgment rules.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The control module is further configured to: before assembling the pre-screened qualified post-embedded parts into batches of the same specifications and models, for each pre-screened qualified post-embedded part, obtain the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflection signal to the amplitude of the second reflection signal corresponding to all chemical anchors on it, and calculate the coefficient of variation of these ratios; if the coefficient of variation is greater than a preset consistency threshold, then the post-embedded part is removed from the pre-screened qualified post-embedded parts and is not included in the batching of the inspection batch.

3. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The control module is further configured to: continuously receive the displacement values ​​measured in real time by the displacement sensor during the load-bearing period of the non-destructive pull-out test on the first sample, obtain the displacement value D1 corresponding to the load-bearing start time t1 and the displacement value D2 corresponding to the load-bearing end time t2, and calculate the displacement change rate V = (D2 - D1) / T within the time period T = t2 - t1; simultaneously, divide the time period T into a first half T1 and a second half T2, and calculate the displacement change rate V1 for the first half and the displacement change rate V2 for the second half respectively; if V2 > V1 and V2 is greater than a preset creep acceleration threshold, then regardless of whether the displacement value of the post-embedded part under the design load value is not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the post-embedded part is regarded as abnormal, triggering the destructive pull-out test on the remaining post-embedded parts in the same inspection batch; if V2 > If V1 but V2 is not greater than the creep acceleration threshold, the post-embedded part is marked as creep non-converged. When the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold, the creep non-converged state of the post-embedded part is used as one of the conditions for triggering expanded non-destructive pull-out sampling.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The control module is further configured to: when the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the first sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold and the destructive pull-out test is not triggered, for each post-embedded part in the first sample, obtain the displacement change rate V1 in the first half and the displacement change rate V2 in the second half during the non-destructive pull-out test load period; when V2 ≤ V1, calculate the creep convergence index β = V2 / V1 for that post-embedded part; then calculate the average creep convergence index β of all post-embedded parts in the first sample that satisfy the condition V2 ≤ V1. avg If β avg If the displacement value is greater than the preset convergence threshold, or if there are post-embedded parts marked as creep non-convergence in the first sample, then an expanded sampling non-destructive pull-out test will be added to the remaining post-embedded parts in the same inspection batch. A third sample with a quantity twice that of the first sample will be drawn, and the same graded loading and holding operation as the first sample will be performed. The inspection batch will be deemed qualified only if the displacement values ​​of all post-embedded parts in the third sample are not greater than the qualified displacement threshold and the destructive pull-out test is not triggered. If the third sample triggers the destructive pull-out test during the inspection process due to excessive displacement or accelerated creep under load, the inspection batch is deemed unqualified.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The control module is further configured to: during the destructive pull-out test, in the process of graded loading, when the load value reaches the design load value, record the displacement value measured by the displacement sensor as a reference displacement D. ref Continue loading in stages until anchorage failure, and record the ultimate tensile strength and the corresponding ultimate displacement D. ult ; Calculate the ductility coefficient μ = D ult / D ref The method of determining whether the inspection batch is qualified according to the counting sampling judgment rule includes: if the ultimate pull-out bearing capacity value of the post-embedded part in the second sample is less than the minimum ultimate bearing capacity threshold, or the ductility coefficient μ is less than the preset ductility threshold, then the post-embedded part is counted as a non-conforming product. When the number of non-conforming products in the second sample is greater than or equal to the number of rejections, the inspection batch is determined to be unqualified; otherwise, it is determined to be qualified.

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The control module is further configured to: before controlling the ultrasonic detection module to acquire the ratio of the first reflected signal amplitude to the second reflected signal amplitude of each chemical anchor, drive the ultrasonic probe to emit a verification pulse into the chemical anchor with preset excitation parameters, and receive the verification reflection signal returned from the end face of the chemical anchor; extract the full width at half maximum (FWHM) W and peak amplitude A of the first echo peak in the time-domain waveform of the verification reflection signal, and calculate the coupling quality factor Q = A / W; and compare the coupling quality factor Q with a preset lower limit value Q for coupling qualification. min The comparison is performed only if Q is not less than Q. min Only then are the amplitudes of the first and second reflected signals collected in this measurement used to calculate the ratio; If Q is less than Q min , the measurement data is discarded and a signal is issued to re-probe the probe contact.

7. The method according to claim 1 or 6, wherein the method is characterized in that, The control module is further configured to: before obtaining the ratio of the amplitude of the first reflected signal to the amplitude of the second reflected signal, perform spectral analysis on the verification reflected signal or the first reflected signal, and extract the peak frequency f in the spectrum. p Given a -6dB bandwidth Δf, calculate the end-face quality index S = f p / Δf; compare the end face quality index S with the preset end face integrity threshold S min Compare them; if S is less than S min If the chemical anchor bolt end face is damaged, the post-installed part will be removed from the initial screening of qualified post-installed parts or marked for re-inspection; only when S is not less than S min Only then is the amplitude data collected in this measurement used to calculate the ratio.

8. The method according to claim 1 or 6, wherein, The control module also verifies the validity of the second reflected signal: after receiving the second reflected signal, it extracts its envelope and identifies the moment of the first zero-crossing point in the envelope as the arrival time t of the thread reflection. r and extract t r Signal energy E within the preset time window before and after r Simultaneously, noise energy E is extracted within the time window prior to the arrival of the second reflected signal. n ; Calculate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the thread reflection r = E r / E n ; will SNR r Compared with the preset lower limit of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) min Comparison, if SNR r Below SNR min If the second reflected signal of the measurement is deemed unreliable, the measurement data is discarded, and the chemical anchor is marked as having failed ultrasonic testing. Furthermore, the control module issues a warning signal, requiring the threaded area of ​​the chemical anchor marked as having failed ultrasonic testing to be cleaned and the probe re-engaged for re-inspection. If the SNR of two consecutive re-inspections is... r Still lower than SNR min If the chemical anchor bolt is not found, the subsequent embedded part will be removed from the initial screening of qualified subsequent embedded parts; only if the SNR... r Not less than SNR min Only then is the amplitude of the second reflected signal measured in that measurement used to calculate the ratio.