Distinguishing evaluation of plastic deformation and fatigue damage using pulsed eddy current testing

Fang, Yang; Qu, Yinqiang; Zeng, Xinlei; Chen, Hong-en; Xie, Shejuan; Wan, Qiang; Uchimoto, Tetsuya; Chen, Zhenmao

doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2023.102972

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the current research, the common electromagnetic nondestructive evaluation methods for defect size evaluation include eddy current testing (ECT) [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ], pulsed eddy current testing (PECT) [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ], and magnetic flux leakage (MFL) testing [ 13 , 14 , 15 ], alternating current field measurement (ACFM) [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. MFL [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ] was limited by wall thickness, while the signal for evaluating defects in thick-walled components is attenuated with increasing wall thickness, and some of them [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ] were often affected by skin effects or magnetic shielding effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Depth Size Based on Layered Magnetization by Double-Sided Scanning for Internal Defects

Deng,

Qian,

Hong

et al. 2024

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quantitative evaluation of defects is extremely important, as it can avoid harm caused by underevaluation or losses caused by overestimation, especially for internal defects. The magnetic permeability perturbation testing (MPPT) method performs well for thick-walled steel pipes, but the burial depth of the defect is difficult to access directly from a single time-domain signal, which is not conducive to the evaluation of defects. In this paper, the phenomenon of layering of magnetization that occurs in ferromagnetic materials under an unsaturated magnetizing field is described. Different magnetization depths are achieved by applying step magnetization. The relationship curves between the magnetization characteristic currents and the magnetization depths are established by finite element simulations. The spatial properties of each layering can be detected by different magnetization layering. The upper and back boundaries of the defect are then localized by a double-sided scan to finally arrive at the depth size of the defect. Defects with depth size of 2 mm are evaluated experimentally. The maximum relative error is 5%.

show abstract