Magnetic Flux Leakage Scanning Velocities for Tank Floor Inspection

Pullen, Ashley Laurent; Charlton, Peter; Pearson, Neil; Whitehead, Nik

doi:10.1109/tmag.2018.2853117

Cited by 29 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The magnetic Reynolds number for this type of problem is in the order of hundreds (>> 1), which indicates the effect of eddy current cannot be neglected [2]. The distortion of the magnetic field under different scanning velocity is widely reported [3,4,5,6,7,8] and it is sensitive to the specimen movement direction, as demonstrated in our previous research [9] and is independent to the orientation of the magnetizing source. This signal deformation can influence the efficiency of the NDT, especially for determining the defect location and its severity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of scanning acceleration on the leakage signal in magnetic flux leakage type of non-destructive testing

Zhang¹,

Cameron²,

Ledger³

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This novel work investigates the influence of the inspection system acceleration on the leakage signal in magnetic flux leakage type of non-destructive testing.The research is addressed both through designed experiments and simulations.The results showed that the leakage signal, represented by using peak to peak value, decreases between 20% and 30% under acceleration. The simulation results indicated that the main reason for the decrease is due to the difference in the distortion of the magnetic field for cases with and without acceleration, which is the result of the different eddy current distributions in the specimen.The findings will help to allow the optimisation of the MFL system to ensure the main defect features can be measured accurately during the machine acceleration. It also shows the importance of conducting measurements at constant velocity, wherever possible.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…The adopted experimental facilities are identical to the work of Pullen et.al. [8] and their set-up is shown in Fig. 1.…”

Section: Experimental Facilities and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of scanning acceleration on the leakage signal in magnetic flux leakage type of non-destructive testing

Zhang¹,

Cameron²,

Ledger³

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…internal [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] inner/inside [8,9], near-side/surface [10][11][12][13], top [14][15][16], front [17], front-side [18,19] external [1][2][3][4][5][6][7], outer/outside [8,20], far-side/surface [10][11][12][13]21], bottom [14][15][16]22], back [17], back-side [18,19,[23][24][25][26], opposite-side [27], sub-surface [28] side' are probably most unequivocal and universal, so these two terms are generally used in the rest of this article.…”

Section: Terms Describing Defectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study on Methods of Distinction Between Near- and Far-Side Defects as Techniques Used Alongside with the Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…The MFL testing has gained good performance in the detection of defects in ferromagnetic objects such as pipelines, wire ropes, tanks, etc. [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. In practical NDT applications, qualitative and quantitative assessment methods are two of the most widely discussed problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defect Width Assessment Based on the Near-Field Magnetic Flux Leakage Method

Chen

et al. 2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic flux leakage (MFL) testing has been widely used as a non-destructive testing method for various materials. However, it is difficult to separate the influences of the defect geometrical parameters such as depth, width, and length on the received leakage signals. In this paper, a “near-field” MFL method is proposed to quantify defect widths. Both the finite element modelling (FEM) and experimental studies are carried out to investigate the performance of the proposed method. It is found that that the distance between two peaks of the “near-field” MFL is strongly related to the defect width and lift-off value, whereas it is slightly affected by the defect depth. Based on this phenomenon, a defect width assessment relying on the “near-field” MFL method is proposed. Results show that relative judging errors are less than 5%. In addition, the analytical expression of the “near-field” MFL is also developed.

show abstract

Magnetic Flux Leakage Scanning Velocities for Tank Floor Inspection

Cited by 29 publications

References 8 publications

Effect of scanning acceleration on the leakage signal in magnetic flux leakage type of non-destructive testing

Effect of scanning acceleration on the leakage signal in magnetic flux leakage type of non-destructive testing

A Comparative Study on Methods of Distinction Between Near- and Far-Side Defects as Techniques Used Alongside with the Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing

Defect Width Assessment Based on the Near-Field Magnetic Flux Leakage Method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About