Study of the Choice of Excitation Frequency for Sub Surface Defect Detection in Electrically Thick Conducting Specimen Using Eddy Current Testing
Source abstract
Abstract
Understanding the scope and limitations of non-destructive testing procedure is essential for selecting the appropriate test parameters for material inspection. This paper presents the scope of material ( $$ \deltas $$ ) and probe dependent ( $$ \deltat $$ ) penetration depths for determining the optimal test frequency ( $$ fopt ) $$ for detection of sub surface defects in electrically thick conducting specimens. Numerical modelling is carried out for a pancake coil above an electrically thick aluminium plate, $$ t/\deltat $$ > 1, to study the influence of the EC probe and defect location ( $$ tdf $$ ) on the test frequency for near and deep sub surface defects. The study concludes that the optimal test frequency, $$ fopt $$ for detection of deep sub surface defects ( $$ tdf /t \approx 1 $$ ) is determined by the probe dependent skin depth, $$ \deltat $$ , and the plate thickness is related to $$ fopt $$ by, $$ t \propto 1/\sqrt {fopt } $$ . The numerical observations were experimentally validated for machined sub surface notches on a 10 mm thick ( $$ t $$ ) aluminium plate.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (21)
Show source-provided references
1. Blitz, J.: Electrical and magnetic methods of nondestructive testing. In: Hilger, A. Bristol, Philadelphia (1991)
2. Capobianco, T.E., Splett, J.D., Iyer, H.K.: Eddy current probe sensitivity as a function of coil construction parameters. Res. Nondestr. Eval. 2(3), 169–186 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/bf0160635610.1007/bf01606356 ↗
3. Bouchala, T., Abdelhadi, B., Benoudjit, A.: Fast analytical modeling of eddy current non-destructive testing of magnetic material. J. Nondestr. Eval. 32(3), 294–299 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-013-0182-z10.1007/s10921-013-0182-z ↗
4. Bouchala, T., Abdelhadi, B., Benoudjit, A.: Novel coupled electric field method for defect characterization in eddy current non-destructive testing systems. J. Nondestr. Eval. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-013-0197-510.1007/s10921-013-0197-5 ↗
5. Kim, J., Le, M., Lee, J., Hwang, Y.H.: Eddy current testing and evaluation of far-side corrosion around rivet in jet-engine intake of aging supersonic aircraft. J. Nondestr. Eval. 33(4), 471–480 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-014-0242-z10.1007/s10921-014-0242-z ↗
6. Sekine, Y., Soyama, H.: Evaluation of equibiaxial compressive stress introduced into austenitic stainless steel using an eddy current method. J. Nondestr. Eval. 31(2), 99–107 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-011-0125-510.1007/s10921-011-0125-5 ↗
7. Hasegawa, K., Oikawa, T., Kasai, N.: Development of an eddy current inspection technique with surface magnetization to evaluate the carburization thickness of ethylene pyrolysis furnace tubes. J. Nondestr. Eval. 31, 349–356 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-012-0146-810.1007/s10921-012-0146-8 ↗
8. Tsukada, K., Miyake, K., Harada, D., Sakai, K., Kiwa, T.: Magnetic nondestructive test for resistance spot welds using magnetic flux penetration and eddy current methods. J. Nondestr. Eval. 32(3), 286–293 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-013-0181-010.1007/s10921-013-0181-0 ↗
9. Dolabdjian, C.P., Perez, L., Haan, V.O.D., Jong, P.A.D.: Performance of magnetic pulsed-eddy-current system using high dynamic and high linearity improved Giant Magneto-Resistance (GMR) Magnetometer. IEEE Sens. J. 6(6), 1511–1517 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2006.88309510.1109/JSEN.2006.883095 ↗
10. Arjun, V., Sasi, B., Rao, B.P.C., Mukhopadhyay, C.K., Jayakumar, T.: Optimisation of pulsed eddy current probe for detection of sub-surface defects in stainless steel plates. Sens. Actuators, A 226, 69–75 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2015.02.01810.1016/j.sna.2015.02.018 ↗
11. Joubert, P.Y., Vourc’h, E., Tassin, A., Le Diraison, Y.: Source separation techniques applied to the detection of subsurface defects in the eddy current NDT of aeronautical lap-joints. NDT E Int. 43(7), 606–614 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.06.00510.1016/j.ndteint.2010.06.005 ↗
12. Soni, A.K., Sasi, B., Thirunavukkarasu, S., Rao, B.P.C.: Development of eddy current probe for detection of deep sub-surface defects. IETE Tech. Rev. 4602, 1–10 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/02564602.2015.111314510.1080/02564602.2015.1113145 ↗
13. Sasi, B., Rao, B.P.C., Thirunavukkarasu, S., Jayakumar, T., Raj, B.: Eddy current-giant magneto-resistive (GMR) sensor for non-destructive detection of deep- surface defects. In: Procedings of National Symposim on Physics and Technology of Sensors, pp. 273–275 (2007)
14. Ye, C., Udpa, L., Udpa, S.: Optimization and validation of rotating current excitation with GMR array sensors for riveted structures inspection. Sensors 16(9), 1512 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3390/s1609151210.3390/s16091512 ↗
15. Park, D.-G., Angani, C.S., Rao, B.P.C., Vértesy, G., Lee, D.-H., Kim, K.-H.: Detection of the subsurface cracks in a stainless steel plate ssing pulsed eddy current. J. Nondestr. Eval. 32(4), 350–353 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-013-0188-610.1007/s10921-013-0188-6 ↗
16. Nagendran, R., Thirumurugan, N., Chinnasamy, N., Janawadkar, M.P., Baskaran, R., Vaidhyanathan, L.S., Sundar, C.S.: Optimum eddy current excitation frequency for sub-surface defect detection in SQUID based non-destructive evaluation. NDT E Int. 43, 713–717 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.08.00310.1016/j.ndteint.2010.08.003 ↗
17. Kundu, T.: Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic NDE for Structure and Material Characterization: Engineering and Biomedical Applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2012)
18. Theodoulidis, T.P., Martinos, J., Poulakis, N.: Numerical results for the WFNDEC 2012 eddy current benchmark problem. AIP Conf. Proc. 1511(1825), 1825–1830 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.478926210.1063/1.4789262 ↗
19. Mottl, Z.: The quantitative relations between true and standard depth of penetration for air-cored probe coils in eddy current testing. Ndt E Int. 23(1), 11–18 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/0963-8695(90)90708-Q10.1016/0963-8695(90)90708-Q ↗
20. Chady, T., Enokizono, M., Sikora, R.: Crack detection and recognition using an eddy current differential probe. IEEE Trans. Magn. 35(3), 1849–1852 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1109/20.76739310.1109/20.767393 ↗
21. Hamia, R., Cordier, C., Dolabdjian, C.: Eddy-current non-destructive testing system for the determination of crack orientation. NDT E Int. 61, 24–28 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.09.00510.1016/j.ndteint.2013.09.005 ↗