A Comparative Study on Methods of Distinction Between Near- and Far-Side Defects as Techniques Used Alongside with the Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Results of the finite element analysis show that a far-side defect in a steel plate, with the depth greater by 10% of the plate thickness than a near-side defect, can produce a very similar magnetic flux leakage (MFL) signal. Due to the fact that a measurement of MFL itself can lead to misclassification of a far-side defect as a near-side one, and thus to underestimation of its depth, a comparative study of three complementary magnetic techniques was performed. The following techniques were studied: surface topology air-gap reluctance system (STARS), residual magnetic flux leakage (RMFL) and stray magnetic flux leakage (SMFL). Numerical results showed that in the case of the STARS and SMFL, defect signatures in signals were observed for investigated near-side defects, but not for far-side defects. The signature of the far-side defect in the RMFL was observed, however its peak-to-peak value was only about 8% of the value corresponding to the near-side defect.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Magnetic Properties and Applications · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. Sorabh, G.A., Chandrasekaran, K.: Finite element modeling of magnetic flux leakage from metal loss defects in steel pipeline. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 16, 316–323 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-016-0073-610.1007/s11668-016-0073-6 ↗
2. Kopp, G., Willems, H.: Sizing limits of metal loss anomalies using tri-axial MFL measurements: a model study. NDT E Int. 55, 75–81 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.01.01110.1016/j.ndteint.2013.01.011 ↗
3. Yilai, M., Li, L.: Research on internal and external defect identification of drill pipe based on weak magnetic inspection. Insight Non-Destr. Test. Cond. Monit. 56, 31–34 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2014.56.1.3110.1784/insi.2014.56.1.31 ↗
4. Jian, Q., Ai, Z.: Internal and external defect identification of pipelines using the PSO-SVM method. Insight Non-Destr. Test. Cond. Monit. 57, 85–91 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2014.57.2.8510.1784/insi.2014.57.2.85 ↗
5. Jiao, J., Chang, Y., Li, G., He, C., Wu, B.: Study on low frequency AC magnetic flux leakage detection for internal and external cracks of ferromagnetic structures. Yi Qi Yi Biao Xue Bao/Chin. J. Sci. Instrum. 37, 1808–1817 (2016)
6. Vanaei, H.R., Eslami, A., Egbewande, A.: A review on pipeline corrosion, in-line inspection (ILI), and corrosion growth rate models. Int. J. Press. Vessel. Pip. 149, 43–54 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.11.00710.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.11.007 ↗
7. Pluvinage, G., Bouledroua, O., Hadj Meliani, M., Suleiman, R.: Corrosion defect analysis using domain failure assessment diagram. Int. J. Press. Vessel. Pip. 165, 126–134 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.06.00510.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.06.005 ↗
8. Liu, B., Cao, Y., Zhang, H., Lin, Y.R., Sun, W.R., Xu, B.: Weak magnetic flux leakage: a possible method for studying pipeline defects located either inside or outside the structures. NDT E Int. 74, 81–86 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2015.05.00810.1016/j.ndteint.2015.05.008 ↗
9. Tsukada, K., Majima, Y., Nakamura, Y., Yasugi, T., Song, N., Sakai, K., Kiwa, T.: Detection of inner cracks in thick steel plates using unsaturated AC magnetic flux leakage testing with a magnetic resistance gradiometer. IEEE Trans. Magn. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2017.271388010.1109/TMAG.2017.2713880 ↗
10. Atherton, D.L., Daly, M.G.: Finite element calculation of magnetic flux leakage detector signals. NDT Int. 20, 235–238 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-9126(87)90247-110.1016/0308-9126(87)90247-1 ↗
11. Pham, H.Q., Trinh, Q.T., Doan, D.T., Tran, Q.H.: Importance of magnetizing field on magnetic flux leakage signal of defects. IEEE Trans. Magn. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2018.280967110.1109/TMAG.2018.2809671 ↗
12. Singh, W.S., Rao, B.P.C., Vaidyanathan, S., Jayakumar, T., Raj, B.: Detection of leakage magnetic flux from near-side and far-side defects in carbon steel plates using a giant magneto-resistive sensor. Meas. Sci. Technol. 19, 015702 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/19/1/01570210.1088/0957-0233/19/1/015702 ↗
13. Pullen, A.L., Charlton, P.C., Pearson, N.R., Whitehead, N.J.: Practical evaluation of velocity effects on the magnetic flux leakage technique for storage tank inspection. Insight Non-Destr. Test. Cond. Monit. 62, 73–80 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2020.62.2.7310.1784/insi.2020.62.2.73 ↗
14. Romero Ramírez, A., Mason, J.S.D., Pearson, N.: Experimental study to differentiate between top and bottom defects for MFL tank floor inspections. NDT E Int. 42, 16–21 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2008.08.00510.1016/j.ndteint.2008.08.005 ↗
15. Jim, C., Pearson, N., Boat, M.: Capability of modern tank floor scanning with magnetic flux leakage. In: Proceedings of the 19th World Conference on Non-Destructive Test. Vol 2016, pp. 1–11 (2016)
16. Pullen, A.L., Charlton, P.C., Pearson, N.R., Whitehead, N.J.: Magnetic flux leakage scanning velocities for tank floor inspection. IEEE Trans. Magn. 54, 1–8 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2018.285311710.1109/TMAG.2018.2853117 ↗
17. Abe, M., Biwa, S., Matsumoto, E.: Evaluation of surface flaw by magnetic flux leakage testing using amorphous MI sensor and neural network. In: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. pp. 15–33. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)10.1007/978-3-642-00578-7_2 ↗
18. Hadi Putera Zaini, M.A., Mawardi Saari, M., Nadzri, N.A., Mohd Halil, A., Tsukada, K.: An MFL probe using shiftable magnetization angle for front and back side crack evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 15th International Colloquium on Signal Processing & Its Applications (CSPA). pp. 157–161. IEEE (2019)10.1109/CSPA.2019.8696064 ↗
19. Zaini, M.A.H.P., Saari, M.M., Nadzri, N.A., Halil, A.M., Hanifah, A.J.S., Ishak, M.: Effect of excitation frequency on magnetic response induced by front- and back-side slits measured by a differential AMR Sensor probe. In: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. pp. 15–24. Springer, New York (2020)10.1007/978-981-15-2317-5_2 ↗
20. Karuppasamy, P., Abudhahir, A., Prabhakaran, M., Thirunavukkarasu, S., Rao, B.P.C., Jayakumar, T.: Model-based optimization of MFL testing of ferromagnetic steam generator tubes. J. Nondestr. Eval. 35, 1–9 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-015-0320-x10.1007/s10921-015-0320-x ↗
21. Atherton, D.L.: Stress-shadow magnetic inspection technique for far-side anomalies in steel pipe. NDT Int. 16, 145–149 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-9126(83)90037-810.1016/0308-9126(83)90037-8 ↗
22. Vértesy, G., Gasparics, A., Tomáš, I.: Inspection of local wall thinning by different magnetic methods. J. Nondestr. Eval. 37, 65 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-018-0515-z10.1007/s10921-018-0515-z ↗
23. Tsukada, K., Yoshioka, M., Kawasaki, Y., Kiwa, T.: Detection of back-side pit on a ferrous plate by magnetic flux leakage method with analyzing magnetic field vector. NDT E Int. 43, 323–328 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.01.00410.1016/j.ndteint.2010.01.004 ↗
24. Sakai, K., Morita, K., Haga, Y., Kiwa, T., Inoue, K., Tsukada, K.: Automatic scanning system for back-side defect of steel structure using magnetic flux leakage method. IEEE Trans. Magn. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2015.245321110.1109/TMAG.2015.2453211 ↗
25. Kasai, N., Fujiwara, Y., Sekine, K., Sakamoto, T.: Evaluation of back-side flaws of the bottom plates of an oil-storage tank by the RFECT. NDT E Int. 41, 525–529 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2008.05.00210.1016/j.ndteint.2008.05.002 ↗
26. Kasai, N., Maeda, T., Tamura, K., Kitsukawa, S., Sekine, K.: Application of risk curve for statistical analysis of backside corrosion in the bottom floors of oil storage tanks. Int. J. Press. Vessel. Pip. 141, 19–25 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.03.01410.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.03.014 ↗
27. Deng, Z., Sun, Y., Kang, Y., Song, K., Wang, R.: A permeability-measuring magnetic flux leakage method for inner surface crack in thick-walled steel pipe. J. Nondestr. Eval. 36, 1–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-017-0447-z10.1007/s10921-017-0447-z ↗
28. Zhang, Y., Sekine, K., Watanabe, S.: Magnetic leakage field due to sub-surface defects in ferromagnetic specimens. NDT E Int. 28, 67–71 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0963-8695(94)00004-410.1016/0963-8695(94)00004-4 ↗
29. Wu, J., Wu, W., Li, E., Kang, Y.: Magnetic Flux Leakage Course of Inner Defects and Its Detectable Depth. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2021(341), 1–11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/S10033-021-00579-Y10.1186/S10033-021-00579-Y ↗
30. Packer, S.A.H., Pearson, N.R., Priewald, R.H.: Methods and apparatus for the inspection of plates and pipe walls, https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/044067502/publication/EP2506003A1?q=EP2506003A1 (2012)
31. Cheng, W.: Magnetic flux leakage testing of reverse side wall-thinning by using very low strength magnetization. J. Nondestr. Eval. 35, 1–9 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-016-0347-710.1007/s10921-016-0347-7 ↗
32. Wang, Z.D., Yao, K., Deng, B., Ding, K.Q.: Theoretical studies of metal magnetic memory technique on magnetic flux leakage signals. NDT E Int. 43, 354–359 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2009.12.00610.1016/j.ndteint.2009.12.006 ↗
33. Babbar, V., Clapham, L.: Residual magnetic flux leakage: a possible tool for studying pipeline defects. J. Nondestr. Eval. 22, 117–125 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JONE.0000022031.16580.5a10.1023/B:JONE.0000022031.16580.5a ↗