journal article·2022-05-04

Comprehensive study on radial coil influence in designing segmented remote field eddy current probe for defect detection in ferromagnetic tubes

T. Vijayachandrika, S. Thirunavukkarasu, B. Purna Chandra Rao

Publisher page

Abstract

In the present study, two types of receiver coils, viz axial and radial type receivers, in the Remote field eddy current technique are considered to detect defects in ferromagnetic tubes. The appropriate distance between the exciter and the receiver coils and the excitation frequency are estimated using the finite element model and validated experimentally. Model-assisted probability of detection studies are performed to examine the capability of radial and axial type receiver coils. Experimental studies on various artificial defects reveal the excellent performance of the radial type receiver coil in terms of the higher number of defect detections, sensitivity and imaging. This paper provides a comprehensive study on radial and axial type receiver coils for developing array probes. Radial coil performs better and also preserves localisation of defect, which is more desirable for developing array probe.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses · Geophysical Methods and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Homi Bhabha National Institute, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, India

Nondestructive Evaluation Division, Metallurgy and Materials Group, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, India

References (37)

Show source-provided references
1. Winston revie · 201510.1002/9781119019213 ↗
2. 10.1016/0029-1021(70)90135-010.1016/0029-1021(70)90135-0 ↗
3. 10.1201/978020391106810.1201/9780203911068 ↗
4. Georgiou GA. · Mater Sci Eng · 2011 · 3
5. 10.3390/s11030252510.3390/s110302525 ↗
6. 10.1007/BF0056577810.1007/BF00565778 ↗
7. 10.1016/S0963-8695(02)00007-510.1016/S0963-8695(02)00007-5 ↗
8. Thirunavukkarasu S. Remote field eddy current based approaches for high sensitive detection of defects in ferromagnetic steam generator tubes [dissertation]. Mumbai: Homi Bhaba National Institute; 2015.
9. Schmidt TR · Mater Eval · 1989 · 47 · 969
10. Atherton DL · Am Soc Nondestruct Test · 1995 · 31 · 6
11. 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.10830610.1016/j.measurement.2020.108306 ↗
12. Atherton DL · Brit J Nondestr Test · 1988 · 30 · 22
13. Falque R · 2014
14. 10.1115/1.199187810.1115/1.1991878 ↗
15. 10.1109/20.14475210.1109/20.144752 ↗
16. Mergelas BJ · Rev Prog Q · 1995 · 14
17. 10.1109/20.48988810.1109/20.489888 ↗
18. 10.1080/0934984960940957910.1080/09349849609409579 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2012.04.00410.1016/j.ndteint.2012.04.004 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2012.12.00210.1016/j.ndteint.2012.12.002 ↗
21. Luo Q · J Nondestruct Eval · 2017 · 36
22. 10.1063/1.496437410.1063/1.4964374 ↗
23. Sun H · IEEE IMTC P · 2019 · 1
24. 10.1080/0934984080266104110.1080/09349840802661041 ↗
25. Sun LW · IEEE Trans Magn · 1988 · 24
26. Park JW · J Magn · 2017 · 22
27. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.09.00310.1016/j.ndteint.2013.09.003 ↗
28. Rajesh SN · Rev Prog Q Adv Cryogen Eng · 1992 · 28 · 265
29. Kelley K · Methodol Eur · 2011 · 8 · 39
30. Department of defense handbook (USA) non destructive evaluation system reliability assessment; 2009. (MIL-HDBK-1823A).
31. 10.1016/j.measurement.2018.10.00810.1016/j.measurement.2018.10.008 ↗
32. Berens AP · Am Soc Metals Int · 1989 · 17 · 689
33. Soni AK · J Nondestructive Test · 2015 · 57 · 508
34. 10.1080/02564602.2018.144451710.1080/02564602.2018.1444517 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.11.00210.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.11.002 ↗
36. 10.1179/00070599679811456310.1179/000705996798114563 ↗
37. 10.1080/00223131.2015.106433210.1080/00223131.2015.1064332 ↗