DataVXJournal of Nondestructive EvaluationPaper
journal article·2019-12

New Discoveries on Electromagnetic Action and Signal Presentation in Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing

Yanhua Sun, Shiwei Liu, Zhiyang Deng, Min Gu, Changde Liu, Lingsong He, Yihua Kang

Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation· Volume 38· Issue 4
Publisher page
Source abstract

Abstract

Based on the authors’ previous work of magnetic flux leakage (MFL) quantitative description and the research plan especially for the magnetic component of eddy current effect factor $$ Bother $$, further explorations for electromagnetic actions, magnetic and signal presentations in the defect in electromagnetic nondestructive testing (ENDT, such as direct current field measurement (DCFM), MFL and eddy current testing (ECT)) are continued here. Primarily, new discoveries indicate that the magnetic component of $$ Bother $$ is actually composed of the secondary magnetic field component of $$ \Delta Bmfl $$ which manifests as raised signal waves and volume current perturbation component of $$ \Delta B\Delta I $$ which features as double peaked signals due to the departure or bypassing of the “volume current” in the defect. What’s more, the concrete expressions of magnetic components are deduced and given through Ampere’s (or the Ampere–Maxwell) law. Afterwards, the theory is well demonstrated and verified by means of finite element analysis for current density and magnetic flux density or MFL signals in typical quasi-static testing by DC magnetization for different specimens with defects. Additionally, suggestions for installation site of sensor elements in ENDT are also given. Finally, a unified evaluation standard for magnetic flux density is formed, which provides the basic theory or analysis principles for the ENDT techniques as well as research directions for precision defect detection and related applications.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation

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

References (25)

Show source-provided references
1. Sukhorukov, V.: Magnetic flux leakage testing method: strong or weak magnetization? Mater. Eval. 71(5), 26–31 (2013)
2. 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. Nondestruct. Eval. 35, 1–9 (2016)10.1007/s10921-015-0320-x ↗
3. Liu, B., He, L.Y., Zhang, H., Cao, Y., Fernandes, H.: The axial crack testing model for long distance oil-gas pipeline based on magnetic flux leakage internal inspection method. Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 103, 275–282 (2017)10.1016/j.measurement.2017.02.051 ↗
4. Dehui, W., Lingxin, S., Xiaohong, W., Zhitian, L.: A novel non-destructive testing method by measuring the change rate of magnetic flux leakage. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 36, 24 (2017)10.1007/s10921-017-0396-6 ↗
5. Phillipp, L.D., Nguyen, Q.H., Derkacht, D.D., et al. Exact first order finite element modeling for eddy current NDE. Res. Nondestr. Eval. 3(4), 235–253 (1991)10.1080/09349849109409515 ↗
6. Raine, A., Lugg, M.: A review of the alternating current field measurement inspection technique. Sens. Rev. 19, 207–213 (1999)10.1108/02602289910279166 ↗
7. Donald, J., Ruschau, J.: Direct current potential difference fatigue crack measurement techniques. In: Marsh, K.J., Smith, R.A., Ritchie, R.O. (eds.) Fatigue Crack Measurement: Techniques and Applications, pp. 11–37. EMAS Ltd., West Midlands (1991)
8. Li, D., Sun, Y., Ye, Z., Kang, Y.: Electric field leakage nondestructive testing principle and its simulation. Mater. Eval. 73, 1438–1445 (2015)
9. Hu, C., Xu, J.: Center frequency shift in pipe inspection using magnetostrictive guided waves. Sensors. Actuat. A: Phys, 298, 111583 (2019)10.1016/j.sna.2019.111583 ↗
10. Sun, Y., Liu, S., Li, D., Ye, Z., Gu, M., Liu, C., et al.: Analyses of the generating mechanisms of standard magnetic flux leakage testing signals. Mater. Eval. 74, 909–918 (2016)
11. Feng, B., Kang, Y., Sun, Y.: Theoretical analysis and numerical simulation of the feasibility of inspecting nonferromagnetic conductors by an MFL testing apparatus. Res. Nondestruct. Eval. 27, 100–111 (2016)10.1080/09349847.2015.1061721 ↗
12. Ivanov, P., Zhang, V., Yeoh, C., Udpa, H., Sun, Y., Udpa, S., et al.: Magnetic flux leakage modeling for mechanical damage in transmission pipelines. IEEE Trans. Magn. 34, 3020–3023 (1998)10.1109/20.717706 ↗
13. Palanisamy, R., Lord, W.: Finite element modeling of electromagnetic NDT phenomena. IEEE Trans. Magn. 15, 1479–1481 (1979)10.1109/TMAG.1979.1060412 ↗
14. Gloria, N., Areiza, M., Miranda, I., Rebello, J.: Development of a magnetic sensor for detection and sizing of internal pipeline corrosion defects. NDT & E Int. 42, 669–677 (2009)10.1016/j.ndteint.2009.06.009 ↗
15. Sun, Y., Kang, Y.: Magnetic mechanisms of magnetic flux leakage nondestructive testing. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 184104 (2013)10.1063/1.4828556 ↗
16. Ravan, M., Amineh, R.K., Koziel, S., Nikolova, N.K., Reilly, J.P.: Sizing of 3-D arbitrary defects using magnetic flux leakage measurements. IEEE Trans. Magn. 46, 1024–1033 (2010)10.1109/TMAG.2009.2037008 ↗
17. Zuoying, H., Peiwen, Q., Liang, C.: 3D FEM analysis in magnetic flux leakage method. NDT & E Int. 39, 61–66 (2006)10.1016/j.ndteint.2005.06.006 ↗
18. Kim, H.M., Im, S.H., Lee, H.J., Park, G.S.: New algorithm for improvement of sizing accuracy of defect depth in MFL type nondestructive testing. In IEEE CEFC 2016—17th Biennial Conference on Electromagnetic Field Computation (2017)10.1109/CEFC.2016.7816028 ↗
19. Daniel, J., Abudhahir, A., Paulin, J.J.: Magnetic flux leakage (MFL) based defect characterization of steam generator tubes using artificial neural networks. J. Magn. 22, 34–42 (2017)10.4283/JMAG.2017.22.1.034 ↗
20. Kim, H.M., Yoo, H.R., Park G.S.: Analysis of the magnetic characteristics in MFL type NDT system for inspecting gas pipelines. In Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol. 415 LNEE, ed, pp. 319–324 (2017)10.1007/978-3-319-50904-4_32 ↗
21. Dodd, C.V., Deeds, W.E.: Analytical solutions to eddy-current probe-coil problems. J. Appl. Phys. 39(6), 2829–2838 (1968)10.1063/1.1656680 ↗
22. Hammond, P.: The calculation of the magnetic field of rotating machines. Part 3: Eddy currents induced in a solid slab by a circular current loop. Proc. IEE Part C 109(16), 508–515 (1962)
23. Sun, Y., Kang, Y.: Magnetic compression effect in present MFL testing sensor. Sens. Actuators A 160, 54–59 (2010)10.1016/j.sna.2010.03.038 ↗
24. Sun, Y., Kang, Y.: A new MFL principle and method based on near-zero background magnetic field. NDT & E Int. 43, 348–353 (2010)10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.01.005 ↗
25. Wu, J., Kang, Y., Tu, J., Sun, Y.: Analysis of the eddy-current effect in the Hi-speed axial MFL testing for steel pipe. Int. J. Appl. Electromagn. Mech. 45, 193–199 (2014)10.3233/JAE-141830 ↗