Effect of Excitation Frequency on Magnetic Response Induced by Front- and Back-Side Slits Measured by a Differential AMR Sensor Probe

Zaini, Mohd Aufa Hadi Putera; Saari, Mohd Mawardi; Nadzri, Nurul A’in; Aiman, M. H.; Hanifah, A. J. S.; Ishak, M.

doi:10.1007/978-981-15-2317-5_2

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…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%

“…It was observed that the quantity called differential magnetic-leaking reluctivity is a linear function of remaining wall thickness. Another example of a research, where a low frequency AC excitation is used to investigate near-and far-side defects is presented by Zaini et al [19]. The authors used a differential probe consisted of two anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) sensors to measure an MFL signal generated by near and far-side slits.…”

Section: Low Frequency Ac Magnetizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Section: Terms Describing Defectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Low Frequency Ac Magnetizationmentioning

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

show abstract

“…The magnetic field measurement methods can generally be classified into several techniques which utilize either the principle of flux leakage measurement or eddy current measurement [16], [17]. The flux leakage measurement refers to the study of magnetic flux that simply 'leaks' out of the sample in the vicinity of cracks, whereas the eddy current measurement is the study of eddy currents that are induced when a conductive sample is exposed to an external magnetic field.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraction of Flux Leakage and Eddy Current Signals Induced by Submillimeter Backside Slits on Carbon Steel Plate Using a Low-Field AMR Differential Magnetic Probe

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) and Eddy Current Testing (ECT) are commonly employed as the non-destructive evaluation (NDE) techniques used to detect defects within the steel. The MFL technique is advantageous in terms of deep defects detection, while the ECT technique excels in providing dense information regarding defects. In this work, artificial MFL and eddy current (EC) signals in ferromagnetic materials are studied, and an experimental magnetic probe that utilizes both techniques is developed for signal verification. The separation between MFL and EC signals is achieved by utilizing the phase-sensitive detection technique, implementing a dynamic referencing method as opposed to the conventional static phase referencing. A finite element method (FEM) based simulation is employed to study and verify the MFL and EC signals measured by the proposed magnetic probe. The proposed magnetic probe features highly sensitive anisotropic magneto-resistive sensors capable of measuring the MFL and EC signals induced by artificial slits of varying depths engraved onto a 2-mm carbon steel plate. Finite element simulations indicate different flux leakage patterns and eddy current signals detected in the vicinity of the back-side slits. A good agreement is observed between the simulated and the measured MFL and EC signals for the optimized frequency range of 110-210 Hz with the corresponding Lissajous curve for the detection of submillimeter back-side slits. The study has shown that the combination of MFL and EC signals can be successfully captured by an appropriate magnetic probe for an enhanced detection performance of back-side defects in ferromagnetic materials.

show abstract

Effect of Excitation Frequency on Magnetic Response Induced by Front- and Back-Side Slits Measured by a Differential AMR Sensor Probe

Cited by 2 publications

References 18 publications

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

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

Extraction of Flux Leakage and Eddy Current Signals Induced by Submillimeter Backside Slits on Carbon Steel Plate Using a Low-Field AMR Differential Magnetic Probe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About