[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (14)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = magnetic NDE

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
45 pages, 11151 KiB  
Review
Evaluation of the Embrittlement in Reactor Pressure-Vessel Steels Using a Hybrid Nondestructive Electromagnetic Testing and Evaluation Approach
by Gábor Vértesy, Madalina Rabung, Antal Gasparics, Inge Uytdenhouwen, James Griffin, Daniel Algernon, Sonja Grönroos and Jari Rinta-Aho
Materials 2024, 17(5), 1106; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17051106 - 28 Feb 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1485
Abstract
The nondestructive determination of the neutron-irradiation-induced embrittlement of nuclear reactor pressure-vessel steel is a very important and recent problem. Within the scope of the so-called NOMAD project funded by the Euratom research and training program, novel nondestructive electromagnetic testing and evaluation (NDE) methods [...] Read more.
The nondestructive determination of the neutron-irradiation-induced embrittlement of nuclear reactor pressure-vessel steel is a very important and recent problem. Within the scope of the so-called NOMAD project funded by the Euratom research and training program, novel nondestructive electromagnetic testing and evaluation (NDE) methods were applied to the inspection of irradiated reactor pressure-vessel steel. In this review, the most important results of this project are summarized. Different methods were used and compared with each other. The measurement results were compared with the destructively determined ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (DBTT) values. Three magnetic methods, 3MA (micromagnetic, multiparameter, microstructure and stress analysis), MAT (magnetic adaptive testing), and Barkhausen noise technique (MBN), were found to be the most promising techniques. The results of these methods were in good agreement with each other. A good correlation was found between the magnetic parameters and the DBTT values. The basic idea of the NOMAD project is to use a multi-method/multi-parameter approach and to focus on the synergies that allow us to recognize the side effects, therefore suppressing them at the same time. Different types of machine-learning (ML) algorithms were tested in a competitive manner, and their performances were evaluated. The important outcome of the ML technique is that not only one but several different ML techniques could reach the required precision and reliability, i.e., keeping the DBTT prediction error lower than a ±25 °C threshold, which was previously not possible for any of the NDE methods as single entities. A calibration/training procedure was carried out on the merged outcome of the testing methods with excellent results to predict the transition temperature, yield strength, and mechanical hardness for all investigated materials. Our results, achieved within the NOMAD project, can be useful for the future potential introduction of this (and, in general, any) nondestructive evolution method. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Materials Physics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The characteristics of radiation embrittlement processes: the change in the transition temperature (DBBT) as a function of the E &gt; 0.1 MeV neutron fluence.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Dimensions (in mm) of the non-cladded and cladded block samples, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of 22NiMoCr37.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of 18MND5-W.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of A508-B.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of HSST-03.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of A508 Cl.2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>NDE features measured on Charpy samples of 15kH2NMFA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Qualitative collation: calculated distribution of the magnetic flux density in a cladded block excited through the cladding when large and small yokes are placed onto the top of the cladding which has different relative permeability [<a href="#B100-materials-17-01106" class="html-bibr">100</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>NDE features measured on cladded blocks through the cladding.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>NDE features measured on non-cladded blocks A508 Cl.2 on two opposite sides.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Possible workflow of the ML method application [<a href="#B103-materials-17-01106" class="html-bibr">103</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Example: Wilcoxon test results obtained on 29 NDE features (i.e., measurement output parameters) of the NOMAD project [<a href="#B103-materials-17-01106" class="html-bibr">103</a>] (threshold = 0.05).</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Example: The relative importance of the features evaluated by the models built with the boosted decision tree (BDT) algorithm and the extra-trees regressor (ETR) algorithm plotted as bar plots in the case of the NOMAD database involving six different tested materials [<a href="#B102-materials-17-01106" class="html-bibr">102</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The correlation plot for the Charpy samples. The true values of the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (DBTT) are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis, and the predictions made by the SVR model are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis. Samples in the training set are plotted as steel blue dots, and samples in the test set are plotted as orange triangles. The grey diagonal line represents a perfect fit. The training and test scores, measured as the mean absolute error (MAE) and R<sup>2</sup> score, are reported in the heading.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The leave-one-out cross-validation procedure results performed on the entire block dataset, which contains 48 samples. The true values of the estimated ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (EstDBTT) are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis, and the predictions made by the SVR model are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis. The measurements taken from different block sides, top, bottom, and through the cladding have been plotted with different colors and shapes. The LOOCV mean absolute error (MAE) and R<sup>2</sup> score are reported in the figure heading.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>The correlation plot for the block samples. The true values of the estimated ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (EstDBTT) are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis, and the predictions made by the SVR model are plotted on the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis. Samples in the training set are plotted as blue/steel blue dots, and samples in the test set are plotted as orange/red triangles. Whether the measurement was made through the cladding or not is indicated by the colors. The grey diagonal line represents a perfect fit. The training and test scores, measured as the mean absolute error (MAE) and R<sup>2</sup> score, are reported in the heading.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>NOMAD tool performance evaluation leaving out the temperature level around 125 °C for training (orange markers).</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Time variation in magnetizing current (<b>a</b>) in the forward (blue) and in the reverse (red) direction and the detected permeability loops (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Permeability matrix.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Probes, designed for hot cell MAT measurements. (<b>Left</b>) Probe for measuring blocks, (<b>Right</b>) probe for measuring Charpy samples [<a href="#B98-materials-17-01106" class="html-bibr">98</a>]. (Here, a sample is also shown, placed on the top (V-notch opposite to the magnetizing yoke.)</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>The micromagnetic multiparameter microstructure and stress analysis (3MA)-X8 system, including the 3MA-X8 device, standard probe, and PC (<b>top</b>); probe and sample holder for Charpy samples (<b>bottom left</b>) and probe and sample holder for block samples (<b>bottom right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A5
<p>MIRBE setup used in the work: (<b>a</b>) noise analyzer and (<b>b</b>) sensor; (<b>c</b>) Schematic of domain (their orientation are indicated by the arrows) growth during magnetic hysteresis cycle using the MIRBE (BN) method.</p>
Full article ">Figure A6
<p>MAT parameter as a function of the DBTT for all measured 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A7
<p>3MA parameter as a function of the DBTT for all measured 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A8
<p>MIRBE parameter as a function of the DBTT for all measured 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A9
<p>Normalized MAT parameters as function of the DBTT for all 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A10
<p>Normalized 3MA parameters as function of the DBTT for all 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A11
<p>Normalized MIRBE parameters as function of the DBTT for all 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A12
<p>Total permeability loops of 15kH2NMFA samples before irradiation (<b>left</b>). The magnified part of the left graph (<b>right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A13
<p>Optimally chosen MAT descriptor as a function of the DBTT for selected 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A14
<p>3MA parameter as a function of the transition temperature for selected 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A15
<p>MIRBE parameter as a function of transition temperature for selected 15kH2NMFA samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure A16
<p>Optimally chosen MAT descriptor as a function of the estimated DBTT on all base material samples (<b>a</b>), and the same correlation after magnetic selection (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">
27 pages, 11567 KiB  
Article
A Comparative Analysis of the Magnetization Methods Used in the Magnetic Nondestructive Testing of Reinforced Concrete Structures
by Paweł Karol Frankowski and Tomasz Chady
Materials 2023, 16(21), 7020; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16217020 - 2 Nov 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1250
Abstract
This work presents how significantly the proper selection of the magnetization method can improve almost all parameters of the magnetic method and affect the effectiveness of the evaluation of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Three magnetization methods are considered in this paper: opposite pole [...] Read more.
This work presents how significantly the proper selection of the magnetization method can improve almost all parameters of the magnetic method and affect the effectiveness of the evaluation of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Three magnetization methods are considered in this paper: opposite pole magnetization (typical solution), same pole magnetization, and (as a reference point) no magnetization. The experiments are carried out in a three-dimensional (XYZ) space. Measurements along each of the axes are discussed in a separate section. The results show that the appropriate selection of the magnetization method can affect noise reduction, signal strength, and the separation of measurements carried out on different samples. This paper also discusses the situations when the magnetization may change the shape, cause deformations of waveforms, affect the area testing, and be used to significantly increase the efficiency of simultaneous evaluation of three basic parameters of RC structure. Experiments and simulations have proven that properly applied magnetization may strongly affect the evaluation’s effectiveness, making the magnetic method one of the most promising techniques in testing RC constructions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smart Non-destructive Testing and Inspection of Engineering Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Example of the sample and sample parameters: (<b>a</b>) presentation of an example sample in the coordinate system, (<b>b</b>) parameters of the rebars used in the experiments, (<b>c</b>) example of the RC sample (number 25 on the rebar is the sample number).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Block scheme of the measuring system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic view of the sample with depicted measurement area, where M1 and M2—magnets; S—sensor (HMC5883L). (<b>a</b>) 2D view from the top; (<b>b</b>) 2D side view—OPM; (<b>c</b>) 2D side view—SPM; (<b>d</b>) 2D side view—NoM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Separation of the RAW waveform into noise and filtered waveform, along with marked amplitudes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Description of the used boxplot.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The spatial distribution of normalized magnetic flux density lines received for both methods of magnetization (OPM and SPM) and two concrete cover thicknesses 30 and 70 mm (simulations) and magnetic permeability <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100. (<b>a</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, (<b>b</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, (<b>c</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm, (<b>d</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The magnetic flux density distribution in the XY plane for all spatial components and both magnetization methods (simulations), <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, magnetic permeability <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100 (<b>a</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, (<b>b</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, (<b>c</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>y</sub>, (<b>d</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>y</sub>, (<b>e</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>, (<b>f</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The magnetic flux density distribution in the XY plane for different magnetic permeability (simulations), <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, and <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm. (<b>a</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100 (<b>b</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100 (<b>c</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10 (<b>d</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10 (<b>e</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 1 (<b>f</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>The magnetic flux density distribution in the XY plane for different magnetic permeability (simulations), <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, and <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm. (<b>a</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100 (<b>b</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100 (<b>c</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10 (<b>d</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10 (<b>e</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 1 (<b>f</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The magnetic flux density distribution in the XY and YZ planes for different magnetic permeability, and <span class="html-italic">h</span> (simulations), <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>, OPM (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 90 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10. (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 90 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>The magnetic flux density distribution in the XY and YZ planes for different magnetic permeability, and <span class="html-italic">h</span> (simulations), <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>, OPM (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 70 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 90 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 10. (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 90 mm, <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The comparison between actual measurements and simulations; magnetic flux density distribution in the XY plane for all spatial components, OPM, <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, magnetic permeability <span class="html-italic">µ</span> = 100. (<b>a</b>) measurement, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, (<b>b</b>) simulation, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>x</sub>, (<b>c</b>) measurement, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>y</sub>, (<b>d</b>) simulation, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>y</sub>, (<b>e</b>) measurement, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>, (<b>f</b>) simulation, <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>z</sub>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The measurements of spatial components of magnetic induction vs. <span class="html-italic">x</span> position for six different concrete cover thicknesses, different samples, and magnetization methods. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>The measurements of spatial components of magnetic induction vs. <span class="html-italic">x</span> position for six different concrete cover thicknesses, different samples, and magnetization methods. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The SNR (signal to noise ratio) calculated for spatial components of magnetic induction vs. <span class="html-italic">h</span> (concrete cover thickness), for 31 measurements made in the measurement range +/− 150 mm from central measurement, (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12 Cont.
<p>The SNR (signal to noise ratio) calculated for spatial components of magnetic induction vs. <span class="html-italic">h</span> (concrete cover thickness), for 31 measurements made in the measurement range +/− 150 mm from central measurement, (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, P4, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM, P4, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P4, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, P3, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM, P3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Euclidean distance between the amplitudes received for samples (P1–P4), three types of magnetization, and two examples of concrete cover thicknesses. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, SPM, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, OPM, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, NoM, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, SPM, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 50 mm, OPM, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">h</span> = 30 mm, NoM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Scan in the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-direction, three types of magnetization, and three spatial components. (<b>a</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, (<b>b</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, (<b>c</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, (<b>d</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, (<b>e</b>) OPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, (<b>f</b>) SPM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, (<b>g</b>) NoM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, (<b>h</b>) NoM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, (<b>i</b>) NoM, <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Normalized measurements in the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis shifted in the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis from the center position, two magnetization methods. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, central point (<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, central point (<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, central point(<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>m</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm, (<b>n</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm, (<b>o</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15 Cont.
<p>Normalized measurements in the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis shifted in the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis from the center position, two magnetization methods. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, central point (<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, central point (<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, central point(<span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm), (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 150 mm, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 100 mm, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 50 mm, (<b>m</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm, (<b>n</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm, (<b>o</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 0 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Comparison of the shapes of normalized waveforms measured in different <span class="html-italic">y</span>-coordinates, four different <span class="html-italic">y</span>-coordinates, and two methods of magnetization. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM. <span class="html-italic">y</span> = 200 mm is a central point <span class="html-italic">y</span>-coordinate.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Summary of normalized <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>max</sub> = <span class="html-italic">f</span>(<span class="html-italic">z</span>) curves for different samples (P1–P4), methods of magnetization, and spatial components of magnetic induction. (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, SPM, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, OPM, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, OPM, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, OPM, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, NoM, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, NoM, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>, NoM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Statistical summary of normalized magnetic induction (<span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>max</sub>) curves for different samples (P1–P4), methods of magnetization, and spatial components of magnetic induction: (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>y</sub></span>, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>The average value of the normalized curve <span class="html-italic">B</span><sub>max</sub> (number of included cases: three spatial components of magnetic induction × four samples).</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 4120 KiB  
Article
Extraction of Flaw Signals from the Mixed 1-D Signals by Denoising Autoencoder
by Seung-Eun Lee, Jinhyun Park, Hak-Joon Kim and Sung-Jin Song
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(6), 3534; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13063534 - 10 Mar 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1474
Abstract
Ultrasonic testing (UT) is one of the most popular non-destructive evaluation (NDE) techniques used in many industries to evaluate structural integrity. The commonly used NDE techniques are basic inspection techniques, such as visual testing (VT), penetration testing (PT), and magnetic testing (MT), and [...] Read more.
Ultrasonic testing (UT) is one of the most popular non-destructive evaluation (NDE) techniques used in many industries to evaluate structural integrity. The commonly used NDE techniques are basic inspection techniques, such as visual testing (VT), penetration testing (PT), and magnetic testing (MT), and advanced inspection techniques, such as UT, radiography testing (RT), eddy current testing (ECT), and phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT). Among the numerous advanced techniques, ultrasonic testing (UT) is usually used for the inspection of welds in various industries. However, the application of UT still has some shortcomings to overcome. One major shortcoming that reduces the precision of UT is the extra signals from the geometrical interface of a specimen. UT uses the reflection indications of the ultrasonic beam. However, the reflection signals from the welding interface and geometry along with the target flaw signal produce mixed signals. The inspectors use a 1-D reflection outcome called the ultrasonic A-scan to evaluate the welding integrity. The mixed ultrasonic A-scan signals are often very difficult to analyze because inspectors must distinguish the target flaw signal of welding from the mixed ultrasonic A-scan signal, which includes the flaw indication as well as the background signal. Therefore, a method to distinguish between the flaw signal and the background signal must be developed for the efficiency of UT. Autoencoder is an artificial neural network that is made for feature extraction from the input. Denoising autoencoder (DAE) is one of the derivative models of the autoencoder which adds or eliminates random noise signals to extract the prominent features. DAE is already widely used in the denoising of images and sound data. The characteristics of DAE are used in this research to distinguish the ultrasonic flaw signal from the mixed ultrasonic A-scan signal. For the training, 2463 mixed A-scan signals were obtained from 45 different standard blocks in which 5 different types of flaws were embedded. For testing, we used 1000 mixed A-scan signals. The performance of the network was evaluated using a point-by-point comparison method. The autoencoder was trained to denoise the background signal from the mixed ultrasonic A-scan, and the target flaw signal was extracted from the original A-scan signal. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances of Ultrasonic Testing in Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Ultrasonic A-scan signal with the flaw indication and the background: (<b>a</b>) initial signal and wedge noise; (<b>b</b>) flaw signal; (<b>c</b>) weldment interface signal and geometrical signal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Specimens used in the acquisition of data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Digitalized UT system and inspection of pipe weldment specimen.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Architecture of the conventional denoising autoencoder.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Difference between ordinary denoising autoencoder and one used in this study: (<b>a</b>) the inputs <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mfenced> <mover accent="true"> <mi>x</mi> <mo>˜</mo> </mover> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> and outputs <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mfenced> <msup> <mi>x</mi> <mo>′</mo> </msup> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> of the ordinary denoising autoencoder that the noisy input is denoised throughout the autoencoder; (<b>b</b>) the inputs <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mfenced> <mover accent="true"> <mi>x</mi> <mo>˜</mo> </mover> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> and outputs <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mfenced> <msup> <mi>x</mi> <mo>′</mo> </msup> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> of the DAE used in this study that the autoencoder extracts the flaw signal out of the mixed signal and denoises the other extra signals beside the flaw signal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The architecture of proposed denoising autoencoder in this study: (<b>a</b>) The input or <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover accent="true"> <mi>x</mi> <mo>˜</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> used in this study where it goes through the denoising autoencoder and its features are saved in the bottleneck hidden layer; (<b>b</b>) The flaw signal or <span class="html-italic">x</span> that is used as validation where all of the extra signals beside the flaw signal are zero-padded. The validation is used for the MSE calculation with the output; (<b>c</b>) The output or <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>x</mi> <mo>′</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> that is reconstructed through the denoising autoencoder where it is compared to the validation signal and the autoencoder learns to extract the flaw signal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The sample flaw signals of every flaw types in the specimens: (<b>a</b>) the A-scan crack signal; (<b>b</b>) the A-scan lack of fusion signal; (<b>c</b>) the A-scan slag inclusion signal; (<b>d</b>) the A-scan porosity signal; (<b>e</b>) the A-scan incomplete penetration signal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The diagram of training procedure for the proposed DAE used in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The architecture of DAE used in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The examples of the performance testing of each flaw types: (<b>a</b>) A-scan mixed crack signal (original signal) and extracted crack flaw signal from the original signal; (<b>b</b>) A-scan mixed lack of fusion signal (original signal) and extracted lack of fusion flaw signal from the original signal; (<b>c</b>) A-scan mixed slag inclusion signal (original signal) and extracted slag inclusion flaw signal from the original signal; (<b>d</b>) A-scan mixed porosity signal (original signal) and extracted porosity flaw signal from the original signal; (<b>e</b>) A-scan mixed incomplete penetration signal (original signal) and extracted incomplete penetration flaw signal from the original signal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The examples of signals that are not extracted properly: (<b>a</b>) A-scan mixed crack signal data and extracted crack signal from flaw #150; (<b>b</b>) A-scan mixed slag inclusion signal data and extracted slag inclusion signal from flaw #892.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 2332 KiB  
Article
Parametric Study to Evaluate the Geometry and Coupling Effect on the Efficiency of a Novel FMM Tool Embedded in Cover Concrete for Corrosion Monitoring
by Sima Kadkhodazadeh, Amine Ihamouten, David Souriou, Xavier Dérobert and David Guilbert
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(21), 5593; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14215593 - 6 Nov 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1554
Abstract
Rebar corrosion represents a major threat to the durability of reinforced concrete structures, primarily in marine environments. Various Non-Destructive Evaluations (NDE) have been developed to detect rebar corrosion; although most of these have delivered successful results, a lack of reliable techniques for proper [...] Read more.
Rebar corrosion represents a major threat to the durability of reinforced concrete structures, primarily in marine environments. Various Non-Destructive Evaluations (NDE) have been developed to detect rebar corrosion; although most of these have delivered successful results, a lack of reliable techniques for proper corrosion prognosis still remains. Under the French Research Agency (ANR) project’s “LabCom OHMIGOD” framework, we introduce here a novel embedded tool to evaluate the level of cover concrete contamination from aggressive agents responsible for causing corrosion. This tool is divided into two parts: a reactive part exposed to corrosion, and a permanent part protected against corrosion. Using magnetic materials in both parts entails “Functional Magnetic Materials” (FMM) and generates a Magnetic Observable (MO). Through the evolution of corrosion on the reactive part, its magnetic properties become affected, which in turn modifies the MO. By means of regular monitoring of MO variations, it is possible to evaluate the aggressive agent ingress. Consequently, by using a variety of FMM tools placed at different concrete depths, it is possible to indirectly evaluate the rebar corrosion risk. This paper presents a numerical model of the tool employing Ansys software. The underlying objective is to investigate tool accuracy through its key parameters, namely, geometry, relative distance to the receiver, coupling effect, and border effect from the rebar. Simulation results demonstrate that by choosing an efficient geometry for the reactive part (25 mm × 25 mm × 1 mm) and position for the tool (between 1 and 3 mm), both a sufficient MO variation range and a negligible coupling effect can be obtained when the FMM is more than 5 cm from any ferromagnetic material. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagram of an FMM tool in cover concrete and the corresponding corrosion scenario: penetration of water, oxygen, and aggressive agents through concrete cracks into the FMM tool, along with protection of the permanent part against exposure to chloride.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Functional Magnetic Materials (FMM): (<b>a</b>) general schematic diagram, (<b>b</b>) 3D view, (<b>c</b>) numerical model with a 1 mm size mesh, (<b>d</b>) magnetic flux density propagation, (<b>e</b>) magnetic flux density in iso values, and (<b>f</b>) magnetic counters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Numerical modeling steps and the associated objectives in each configuration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Numerical modeling diagrams: (<b>a</b>) Configuration 1 with a single FMM sensor, (<b>b</b>) Configuration 2 with three FMM tools in concrete, and (<b>c</b>) Configuration 3 with three FMM tools in concrete (including rebar).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Magnetic flux density of the FMM tool in the presence of the reactive part as a magnetic shield; (<b>b</b>) magnetic flux density of the FMM tool after total removal of the shield (reactive part) by corrosion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>MO vs. increasing reactive part length: L1 = 8 mm, L2 = 14 mm, and L3 = 18 mm, with a constant thickness value equal to 1 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>MO vs. increasing reactive-part thickness: h1 = 0.2 mm, h2 = 0.5 mm, and h3 = 0.8 mm, with a constant surface-area value equal to 18 mm<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mo>×</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>18 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Configuration 1: relative attenuation percentage of MO with a constant reactive part value of 25 mm<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mo>×</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>25 mm and a variable reactive-part thickness, as derived for four distinct distances between tool and external receiver.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Configuration 1: relative MO attenuation percentage vs. the increase in reactive part length, with a constant thickness value = 1 mm, as derived for four distinct distances between tool and external receiver.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Layout of Configuration 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Numerical model of Configuration 2: MO for each FMM tool independently vs. MO from all three tools with reactive-part dimensions of 25 mm × 25 mm × 1 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Configuration 2: variations in magnetic flux density (MO) relative to a decreasing reactive-part thickness with a constant reactive-part surface area of 25 mm × 25 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Configuration 3: three FMM tools embedded in cover concrete with rebar, featuring variable thickness and a constant reactive-part surface area equal to 25 mm × 25 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Numerical model of Configuration 3: MO for each FMM tool independently vs. MO from all three tools with reactive-part dimensions of 25 mm × 25 mm × 1 mm in the presence of rebar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Configuration 3: output signal with reactive-part variations in the presence of rebar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Comparison of raw MO values for the multi-tool model when applying an identical tool geometry value: 25 mm × 25 mm × 1 mm for Configurations 2 and 3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Percentage of relative MO attenuation with increasing reactive-part thickness and a constant surface area of 25 mm × 25 mm for Configurations 2 and 3.</p>
Full article ">
11 pages, 5901 KiB  
Article
Magnetic Evaluation of Heat-Resistant Martensitic Steel Subjected to Microstructure Degradation
by Yi Li, Chao Sun, Kai Liu, Tong Xu and Binbin He
Materials 2022, 15(14), 4865; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144865 - 13 Jul 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1448
Abstract
The present paper investigates the use of the magnetic hysteresis loop technique to nondestructively evaluate microstructural degradation in heat-resistant martensitic (HRM) steels. The degradation impairs the safe operation of thermal power plants and it is thus essential to periodically assess it using nondestructive [...] Read more.
The present paper investigates the use of the magnetic hysteresis loop technique to nondestructively evaluate microstructural degradation in heat-resistant martensitic (HRM) steels. The degradation impairs the safe operation of thermal power plants and it is thus essential to periodically assess it using nondestructive evaluation (NDE) techniques. In this contribution, HRM steels are thermally aged up to 16,000 h at 675 °C to simulate the microstructural degradation, then the changes in the magnetic coercivity, hardness, and microstructure are systematically characterized and the relations between them are determined. Both coercivity and hardness decrease with thermal aging duration, which can be interpreted in terms of the microstructure parameters’ evolution based on the pinning of crystal defects on domain walls and dislocations. Coercivity and hardness share the same softening trend with aging time, and good linear relations between coercivity, hardness, and microstructure parameters are found. These results provide a key to understanding the magnetic parameter evolution in HRM steels and suggest the possibility of using magnetic technologies for the NDE of microstructure degradation in thermal power plants. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Materials Physics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Hysteresis loops of P91 steels processed by aging at 675 °C for different durations. (<b>b</b>) The magnification of the hysteresis loops around the zero point. (<b>c</b>) Coercivity of P91 steels thermally aged for various times. Coercivity is the magnetic field when the magnetization is zero.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Vickers hardness of the present steels with varying aging times. The error bar represents the 95% confidence interval of the measurements.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>SEM images illustrating the coarsening of M<sub>23</sub>C<sub>6</sub> precipitates with the increase in duration at 675 °C for P91 steels, including (<b>a</b>) 0 h, (<b>b</b>) 1000 h, (<b>c</b>) 4000 h, and (<b>d</b>) 16,000 h. The bright particles are M<sub>23</sub>C<sub>6</sub> precipitates. The wide arrows mark the prior austenite grain boundaries (PAGBs) and the narrow arrows denote the sub-grain boundaries (SGBs). Most M<sub>23</sub>C<sub>6</sub> precipitates are located at these boundaries.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>TEM images showing the recovery of martensitic lath structure in the present Gr.91 steels with different durations at 675 °C, including (<b>a</b>) 0 h, (<b>b</b>) 1000 h, (<b>c</b>) 4000 h, and (<b>d</b>) 16,000 h. The arrows in (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) indicate some recovered lath segments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The evolution of dislocation density in the present P91 steels with respect to their different aging durations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The relation between the lath width of martensite and the spacing of M<sub>23</sub>C<sub>6</sub> precipitates.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Dependence of coercivity on the square root of dislocation density during the early aging stage (&lt;500 h); (<b>b</b>) dependence of coercivity on the spacing of M<sub>23</sub>C<sub>6</sub> precipitates at the aging stage beyond 500 h.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The relation between Vickers hardness and coercivity in the present steel with different age durations.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 7138 KiB  
Article
Magnetic Recording Method (MRM) for Nondestructive Evaluation of Ferromagnetic Materials
by Tomasz Chady, Ryszard D. Łukaszuk, Krzysztof Gorący and Marek J. Żwir
Materials 2022, 15(2), 630; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15020630 - 14 Jan 2022
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2661
Abstract
This paper proposes and experimentally investigates a novel nondestructive testing method for ferromagnetic elements monitoring, the Magnetic Recording Method (MRM). In this method, the inspected element must be magnetized in a strictly defined manner before operation. This can be achieved using an array [...] Read more.
This paper proposes and experimentally investigates a novel nondestructive testing method for ferromagnetic elements monitoring, the Magnetic Recording Method (MRM). In this method, the inspected element must be magnetized in a strictly defined manner before operation. This can be achieved using an array of permanent magnets arranged to produce a quasi-sinusoidal magnetization path. The magnetic field caused by the original residual magnetization of the element is measured and stored for future reference. After the operation or loading, the magnetic field measurement is repeated. Analysis of relative changes in the magnetic field (for selected components) allows identifying applied stress. The proposed research methodology aims to provide information on the steel structure condition unambiguously and accurately. An interpretation of the results without referring to the original magnetization is also possible but could be less accurate. The method can be used as a standard technique for NDT (Non-Destructive Testing) or in structural health monitoring (SHM) systems. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Micro Non-destructive Testing and Evaluation)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Sample shape and dimensions with depicted measurement area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The array of magnets over the sample under magnetization.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The measuring procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The stress–strain curve obtained for the sample made of S355. S01–S08—eight samples loaded to a different degree in elastic and plastic regions’ volume depicted on the curve.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Results of 2D measurements of the magnetic field in the case of sample S05. (<b>a</b>) Component <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> before tensile loading; (<b>b</b>) component <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> before tensile loading; (<b>c</b>) component <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> after tensile loading; (<b>d</b>) component <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> after tensile loading.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Components of the magnetic field measured for the magnetized samples before (red line) and after tensile loading (blue line): (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S01, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S01, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S02, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S02, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S03, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S03, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S04, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S04, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S05, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S05, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S06, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S06, (<b>m</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S07, (<b>n</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S07, (<b>o</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S08, (<b>p</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S08.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Components of the magnetic field measured for the magnetized samples before (red line) and after tensile loading (blue line): (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S01, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S01, (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S02, (<b>d</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S02, (<b>e</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S03, (<b>f</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S03, (<b>g</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S04, (<b>h</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S04, (<b>i</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S05, (<b>j</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S05, (<b>k</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S06, (<b>l</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S06, (<b>m</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S07, (<b>n</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S07, (<b>o</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span> for sample S08, (<b>p</b>) <span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span> for sample S08.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Relative mean changes in the magnetic field in the case of the samples S01–S08 plotted versus the strain: (<b>a</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>; (<b>b</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Relative mean changes in the magnetic field in the case of the samples S01–S04 plotted versus the stress: (<b>a</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>; (<b>b</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Relative mean changes in the magnetic field in the case of the samples S05–S08 plotted versus the strain. (<b>a</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>x</sub></span>; (<b>b</b>) component Δ<span class="html-italic">B<sub>z</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Relative changes in the signal frequency in the case of the samples S05–S08 plotted versus the strain. (<b>a</b>) Δ<span class="html-italic">f<sub>Bx</sub></span>; (<b>b</b>) Δ<span class="html-italic">f<sub>Bz</sub></span>.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 4077 KiB  
Article
Experimental Consideration of Conditions for Measuring Residual Stresses of Rails Using Magnetic Barkhausen Noise Method
by Young-In Hwang, Yong-Il Kim, Dae-Cheol Seo, Mu-Kyung Seo, Woo-Sang Lee, Segon Kwon and Ki-Bok Kim
Materials 2021, 14(18), 5374; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14185374 - 17 Sep 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 2259
Abstract
Residual stress, a factor affecting the fatigue and fracture characteristics of rails, is formed during the processes of fabrication and heat treatment, and is also generated by vertical loads on wheels due to the weight of vehicles. Moreover, damage to rails tends to [...] Read more.
Residual stress, a factor affecting the fatigue and fracture characteristics of rails, is formed during the processes of fabrication and heat treatment, and is also generated by vertical loads on wheels due to the weight of vehicles. Moreover, damage to rails tends to accelerate due to the continuous increase in the number of passes and to the high speed of passing vehicles. Because this can have a direct effect on safety accidents, having a technique to evaluate and analyze the residual stresses in rails accurately is very important. In this study, stresses due to tensile loads applied to new rails and residual stresses remaining in used rails were measured by using magnetic Barkhausen noise method. First, a magnetization frequency and noise band suitable for the rails were selected. Moreover, by applying tensile loads to specimens and comparing the difference in magnetization amplitudes for each load, the stresses applied to the rails by using the magnetic Barkhausen noise method were measured, and the analysis of the results was verified. Based on these results, the difference in the results for the loads asymmetrically applied according to the wheel shape was analyzed by measuring for the head parts of used rails. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Photograph of the experimental setup for selecting experimental conditions to measure stresses on rails.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Photograph of specimens for experiment to measure stress under tensile loads.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Photograph of the experimental setup for measuring stresses in rail specimens under tensile loads by the servo-hydraulic test system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Photograph of three used rail specimens applied in experiments to measure residual stresses by magnetic Barkhausen noise.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Photograph of the experimental setup for measuring residual stresses in the used rails.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Measured magnetic Barkhausen noise intensity values for the indicated noise bands at magnetization frequencies of (<b>a</b>) 45 Hz, (<b>b</b>) 50 Hz, (<b>c</b>) 90 Hz, and (<b>d</b>) 120 Hz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Measured magnetic Barkhausen noise intensity values for indicated tensile stresses in (<b>a</b>) longitudinal and (<b>b</b>) perpendicular directions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Result of calibration using regression analysis on stress in longitudinal direction vs. magnetic Barkhausen noise intensity value graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Measured magnetic Barkhausen noise intensity values with magnetization frequency of 120 Hz for Region (1) to (3) of each rail specimens: (<b>a</b>) Sample A, (<b>b</b>) Sample B, and (<b>c</b>) Sample C.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 48629 KiB  
Article
New Magnetostrictive Transducer Designs for Emerging Application Areas of NDE
by Sergey Vinogradov, Adam Cobb and Jay Fisher
Materials 2018, 11(5), 755; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11050755 - 8 May 2018
Cited by 21 | Viewed by 6033
Abstract
Magnetostrictive transduction has been widely utilized in nondestructive evaluation (NDE) applications, specifically for the generation and reception of guided waves for the long-range inspection of components such as pipes, vessels, and small tubes. Transverse-motion guided wave modes (e.g., torsional vibrations in pipes) are [...] Read more.
Magnetostrictive transduction has been widely utilized in nondestructive evaluation (NDE) applications, specifically for the generation and reception of guided waves for the long-range inspection of components such as pipes, vessels, and small tubes. Transverse-motion guided wave modes (e.g., torsional vibrations in pipes) are the most common choice for long-range inspection applications, because the wave motion is in the plane of the structure surface, and therefore does not couple well to the surrounding material. Magnetostrictive-based sensors for these wave modes using the Wiedemann effect have been available for several years. An alternative configuration of a sensor for generating and receiving these transverse-motion guided waves swaps the biasing and time-varying magnetic field directions. This alternative design is a reversed Wiedemann effect magnetostrictive transducer. These transducers exhibit a number of unique features compared with the more conventional Wiedemann sensor, including: (1) the use of smaller rare earth permanent magnets to achieve large, uniform, and self-sustained bias field strengths; (2) the use of more efficient electric coil arrangements to induce a stronger time-varying magnetic field for a given coil impedance; (3) beneficial non-linear operating characteristics, given the efficiency improvements in both magnetic fields; and (4) the ability to generate unidirectional guided waves when the field arrangement is combined with a magnetically soft ferromagnetic strip (patch). Reversed Wiedemann effect magnetostrictive transducers will be presented that are suitable for different inspection applications, one using electromagnetic generation and reception directly in a ferromagnetic material, and another design that integrates a magnetostrictive patch to improve its efficiency and enable special operating characteristics. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Magnetostrictive Composite Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Two alternative implementations of Wiedemann effect: (<b>a</b>) direct Wiedemann effect when the circumferential field is permanent, and (<b>b</b>) a reversed Wiedemann effect when the circumferential field is time-varying.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Sensors utilizing a direct Wiedemann Effect: (<b>a</b>) electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) heat exchanger probe for the guided wave testing of carbon steel heat exchanger tubing, (<b>b</b>) magnetostrictive sensor (MsS) used for the guided wave testing of pipes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Sensors utilizing a reversed Wiedemann effect: (<b>a</b>) a magnetostrictive transducer (MsT) for the guided wave testing of pipes; (<b>b</b>) an EMAT MsT for the testing of heat exchanger tubes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Photograph of pipe and MsT probe used for harmonic generation experiments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Acquired signal (<b>a</b>) together with its FFT (<b>b</b>) for a 50-kHz excitation with a bias magnet liftoff of 4 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Acquired signal (<b>a</b>) and its FFT (<b>b</b>) for a 50-kHz excitation frequency with no bias magnet liftoff.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Illustration of the effect of clipping a sinusoid on its frequency content. The top two figures show a 300-kHz sinusoid with a Gaussian envelope applied (<b>a</b>), and its associated spectrum (<b>b</b>). The bottom two figures show the same sinusoid clipped to be within the range of −0.1 to 0.1 (<b>c</b>), and its associated spectrum (<b>d</b>). Note how the unclipped spectrum has its energy concentrated near 300 kHz, whereas the clipped spectrum has energy at the odd harmonics of 300 kHz (i.e., 300 kHz, 900 kHz, 1.5 MHz, etc.).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Acquired guided wave reflection signals from the end of the pipe with no magnet liftoff and at different transmitter current settings: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) show the normal current level signal and resulting FFT, respectively; (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) show the doubled current signal and FFT, respectively; (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) show quadrupled current signal and FFT, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Directional transmission of guided waves: (<b>a</b>) utilizing two quarter-wavelength spaced meander coils (each coil has two conductors that are separated by one half of the wavelength); (<b>b</b>) utilizing two quarter-wavelength spaced MsT type transducers (each transducer in turn has two channels separated by one half of the wavelength and connected to reject the unwanted direction).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Unidirectional MsT probe arrangement—the ferromagnetic strip is magnetized by a permanent magnet offset from the strip center.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Reflections obtained from the ends of the stainless steel plate with the arrangement shown in <a href="#materials-11-00755-f010" class="html-fig">Figure 10</a> (upper image), and the spectrogram of signals obtained from the opposite plate edges (lower image).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Demonstration of unidirectional probe operation at 200-kHz and 430-kHz center frequencies on a 0.25-inch thick carbon steel plate: (<b>a</b>) test arrangement using 1.5-inch wide MsT transducer, (<b>b</b>) 200-kHz data, (<b>d</b>) 430-kHz data. The spectrograms of signals in panels (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) are shown in (<b>c</b>,<b>e</b>).</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 27485 KiB  
Article
Magnetic Flux Leakage Sensing and Artificial Neural Network Pattern Recognition-Based Automated Damage Detection and Quantification for Wire Rope Non-Destructive Evaluation
by Ju-Won Kim and Seunghee Park
Sensors 2018, 18(1), 109; https://doi.org/10.3390/s18010109 - 2 Jan 2018
Cited by 66 | Viewed by 7369
Abstract
In this study, a magnetic flux leakage (MFL) method, known to be a suitable non-destructive evaluation (NDE) method for continuum ferromagnetic structures, was used to detect local damage when inspecting steel wire ropes. To demonstrate the proposed damage detection method through experiments, a [...] Read more.
In this study, a magnetic flux leakage (MFL) method, known to be a suitable non-destructive evaluation (NDE) method for continuum ferromagnetic structures, was used to detect local damage when inspecting steel wire ropes. To demonstrate the proposed damage detection method through experiments, a multi-channel MFL sensor head was fabricated using a Hall sensor array and magnetic yokes to adapt to the wire rope. To prepare the damaged wire-rope specimens, several different amounts of artificial damages were inflicted on wire ropes. The MFL sensor head was used to scan the damaged specimens to measure the magnetic flux signals. After obtaining the signals, a series of signal processing steps, including the enveloping process based on the Hilbert transform (HT), was performed to better recognize the MFL signals by reducing the unexpected noise. The enveloped signals were then analyzed for objective damage detection by comparing them with a threshold that was established based on the generalized extreme value (GEV) distribution. The detected MFL signals that exceed the threshold were analyzed quantitatively by extracting the magnetic features from the MFL signals. To improve the quantitative analysis, damage indexes based on the relationship between the enveloped MFL signal and the threshold value were also utilized, along with a general damage index for the MFL method. The detected MFL signals for each damage type were quantified by using the proposed damage indexes and the general damage indexes for the MFL method. Finally, an artificial neural network (ANN) based multi-stage pattern recognition method using extracted multi-scale damage indexes was implemented to automatically estimate the severity of the damage. To analyze the reliability of the MFL-based automated wire rope NDE method, the accuracy and reliability were evaluated by comparing the repeatedly estimated damage size and the actual damage size. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Intelligent Sensing Technologies for Nondestructive Evaluation)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic of the MFL method [<a href="#B9-sensors-18-00109" class="html-bibr">9</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic of the Hall effect [<a href="#B10-sensors-18-00109" class="html-bibr">10</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Effect of the enveloping process [<a href="#B9-sensors-18-00109" class="html-bibr">9</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Common damage index for an MFL signal [<a href="#B9-sensors-18-00109" class="html-bibr">9</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>New damage indexes using the relationship between the envelope signal and the threshold [<a href="#B9-sensors-18-00109" class="html-bibr">9</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Specification of the wire rope specimens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Specification of the wire rope specimens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Experimental setup.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>8-channel MFL sensor head.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Overlapped graphs of the enveloped MFL signals for wire ropes #1–#4.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Variation of the enveloped MFL signal according to damage depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Variation of the P-P value (P-P<sub>V</sub>) according to the damage depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Variation of the peak value of envelope (E<sub>P</sub>) according to the damage depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Variation of the width of envelope (E<sub>W</sub>) according to the damage depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Variation of the area of envelope (E<sub>A</sub>) according to the damage depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Variation of the enveloped MFL signals according to the damage width.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>P-P width (P-P<sub>W</sub>) according to the damage width.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Width of the envelope (E<sub>W</sub>) according to damage width.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>FWHM according to the damage width.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Two-step ANN pattern recognition process.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Three-dimensional distribution of the damage indexes for training the ANN for depth estimation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Estimated depth value using the ANN classifier.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Three-dimensional distribution of the damage indexes for training the ANN for width estimation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Estimated width value using the ANN classifier.</p>
Full article ">
5566 KiB  
Review
Superconducting Quantum Interferometers for Nondestructive Evaluation
by M. I. Faley, E. A. Kostyurina, K. V. Kalashnikov, Yu. V. Maslennikov, V. P. Koshelets and R. E. Dunin-Borkowski
Sensors 2017, 17(12), 2798; https://doi.org/10.3390/s17122798 - 6 Dec 2017
Cited by 18 | Viewed by 8218
Abstract
We review stationary and mobile systems that are used for the nondestructive evaluation of room temperature objects and are based on superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs). The systems are optimized for samples whose dimensions are between 10 micrometers and several meters. Stray magnetic [...] Read more.
We review stationary and mobile systems that are used for the nondestructive evaluation of room temperature objects and are based on superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs). The systems are optimized for samples whose dimensions are between 10 micrometers and several meters. Stray magnetic fields from small samples (10 µm–10 cm) are studied using a SQUID microscope equipped with a magnetic flux antenna, which is fed through the walls of liquid nitrogen cryostat and a hole in the SQUID’s pick-up loop and returned sidewards from the SQUID back to the sample. The SQUID microscope does not disturb the magnetization of the sample during image recording due to the decoupling of the magnetic flux antenna from the modulation and feedback coil. For larger samples, we use a hand-held mobile liquid nitrogen minicryostat with a first order planar gradiometric SQUID sensor. Low-Tc DC SQUID systems that are designed for NDE measurements of bio-objects are able to operate with sufficient resolution in a magnetically unshielded environment. High-Tc DC SQUID magnetometers that are operated in a magnetic shield demonstrate a magnetic field resolution of ~4 fT/√Hz at 77 K. This sensitivity is improved to ~2 fT/√Hz at 77 K by using a soft magnetic flux antenna. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Intelligent Sensing Technologies for Nondestructive Evaluation)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic representation of a Nb-based low-T<sub>c</sub> Josephson junction developed at IRE.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic representation of Nb-based low-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID sensor developed at IRE. The cylindrical superconducting (Nb) shield has been removed for clarity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic representation of a step-edge high-T<sub>c</sub> Josephson junction developed at FZJ [<a href="#B28-sensors-17-02798" class="html-bibr">28</a>,<a href="#B29-sensors-17-02798" class="html-bibr">29</a>,<a href="#B30-sensors-17-02798" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. (7.1) Textured MgO substrate with a step height of ~400 nm; (7.2, 7.3) Graphoepitaxial buffer layers; (7.4) YBCO film; (7.5) Grain boundaries.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Liquid nitrogen minicryostat used for the operation of a high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID gradiometer in an NDE system. The inset shows a photograph of the directly coupled high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID first order planar gradiometer, which was produced on a 1 cm<sup>2</sup> LAO substrate and installed in the cryostat; (<b>b</b>) Scan of an airplane wheel rim using the high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID gradiometer system. The robotic arm scanner moves the cryostat along the outer surface of the wheel rim, while the wheel is rotated around its axis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Photograph of a single-channel low-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID-based gradiometer system with a liquid He cryostat and a measurement probe. The first-order gradiometer was made of insulated Nb wire with a diameter of 0.05 mm using a “1:1” configuration (one lower and one upper turn) on a textolite rod. The diameter of the pick-up loops of the gradiometer is 4 mm and the base line of the gradiometer is 40 mm. The initial unbalance of the gradiometer is below 1%. The gradiometer ends are fixed mechanically on the Nb lamella of the SQUID sensor for connection to the SQUID input coil.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Photograph of a high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID microscope with a fiberglass cryostat that can support 0.8 L of liquid nitrogen; (<b>b</b>) Schematic diagram of a high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID with a magnetic flux antenna made of soft magnetic foil penetrating the directly coupled pick-up loop [<a href="#B49-sensors-17-02798" class="html-bibr">49</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Photograph of a high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID (1) assembled on a sapphire rod, showing parts of the magnetic flux antenna (2) and the modulation coil (3) on ferromagnetic wires (4); (<b>b</b>) Sketch of a DC SQUID with a directly coupled pick-up loop assembled together with low temperature (1) and room temperature (2) parts of the flux antenna.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>3D color-scale image of the magnetic field distribution measured over a weld seam (indicated by a black line) made by laser welding. The range of color-scale values is from −100 nT (blue) to 100 nT (red). The scanned area is 30 mm × 10 mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Magnetic field distribution of the demagnetized state of a 30-nm-thick Co film (contours showing the Co pattern have been added to the picture) prepared on a 50-nm-thick SiN membrane. The color scale represents magnetic fields of between −10 nT (blue) and 10 nT (red). Signals recorded from the magnetic domain structure of 40 µm, 30 µm and 20 µm dots are observable.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Noise spectra of a 20 mm high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID magnetometer measured at 77 K in a magnetic shield: (<b>a</b>) without a ferromagnetic antenna and (<b>b</b>) with a ferromagnetic antenna. The inset shows a measurement of human magnetoencephalography performed using a high-T<sub>c</sub> DC SQUID magnetometer that has a sensitivity in the femto-Tesla range at low frequencies.</p>
Full article ">
4627 KiB  
Article
Eddy Current Pulsed Thermography with Different Excitation Configurations for Metallic Material and Defect Characterization
by Gui Yun Tian, Yunlai Gao, Kongjing Li, Yizhe Wang, Bin Gao and Yunze He
Sensors 2016, 16(6), 843; https://doi.org/10.3390/s16060843 - 8 Jun 2016
Cited by 74 | Viewed by 8669
Abstract
This paper reviews recent developments of eddy current pulsed thermography (ECPT) for material characterization and nondestructive evaluation (NDE). Due to the fact that line-coil-based ECPT, with the limitation of non-uniform heating and a restricted view, is not suitable for complex geometry structures evaluation, [...] Read more.
This paper reviews recent developments of eddy current pulsed thermography (ECPT) for material characterization and nondestructive evaluation (NDE). Due to the fact that line-coil-based ECPT, with the limitation of non-uniform heating and a restricted view, is not suitable for complex geometry structures evaluation, Helmholtz coils and ferrite-yoke-based excitation configurations of ECPT are proposed and compared. Simulations and experiments of new ECPT configurations considering the multi-physical-phenomenon of hysteresis losses, stray losses, and eddy current heating in conjunction with uniform induction magnetic field have been conducted and implemented for ferromagnetic and non-ferromagnetic materials. These configurations of ECPT for metallic material and defect characterization are discussed and compared with conventional line-coil configuration. The results indicate that the proposed ECPT excitation configurations can be applied for different shapes of samples such as turbine blade edges and rail tracks. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Physical Sensors)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagram of eddy current pulsed thermography (ECPT).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Proposed Helmholtz-coil configuration of ECPT. (<b>a</b>) Schematic diagram of Helmholtz-coil-based ECPT system. (<b>b</b>) Magnetic flux distribution with uniform field between two coils.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Proposed ferrite-yoke-based configuration of ECPT. (<b>a</b>) Schematic diagram of ferrite-yoke-based ECPT system. (<b>b</b>) Magnetic flux distribution in ferromagnetic material between yoke poles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Numerical modeling for ECPT simulation with different configurations. (<b>a</b>) Line-coil ECPT. (<b>b</b>) Helmholtz-coil ECPT. (<b>c</b>) Ferrite-yoke-based ECPT.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Simulation results of ECPT with different configurations such as line-coil-, Helmholtz-coil-, and Ferrite-yoke-based excitation on a multi-physical-phenomenon and coupling effect.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Simulation results of ECPT with different configurations. (<b>a</b>) Line-coil ECPT for the crack, (<b>b</b>) Helmholtz-coil-based ECPT for the crack edge. (<b>c</b>) Ferrite-yoke-based ECPT for the angular crack.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Experimental system of ECPT.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>ECPT with different configurations. (<b>a</b>) Line-coil ECPT. (<b>b</b>) Helmholtz-coil ECPT and (<b>c</b>) Ferrite-yoke-based structure for ECPT.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Experimental results of ECPT with different configurations. (<b>a</b>) Line-coil for multiple cracks. (<b>b</b>) Helmholtz-coil for crack edges and (<b>c</b>) Ferrite-yoke excitation for multiple cracks.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Experimental results of ECPT for the same sample with RCF multiple cracks using (<b>a</b>) line-coil. (<b>b</b>) Helmholtz-coil and (<b>c</b>) ferrite-yoke excitation configurations.</p>
Full article ">
4222 KiB  
Article
An Electromagnetic Sensor with a Metamaterial Lens for Nondestructive Evaluation of Composite Materials
by Adriana Savin, Rozina Steigmann, Alina Bruma and Roman Šturm
Sensors 2015, 15(7), 15903-15920; https://doi.org/10.3390/s150715903 - 3 Jul 2015
Cited by 42 | Viewed by 9421
Abstract
This paper proposes the study and implementation of a sensor with a metamaterial (MM) lens in electromagnetic nondestructive evaluation (eNDE). Thus, the use of a new type of MM, named Conical Swiss Rolls (CSR) has been proposed. These structures can serve as electromagnetic [...] Read more.
This paper proposes the study and implementation of a sensor with a metamaterial (MM) lens in electromagnetic nondestructive evaluation (eNDE). Thus, the use of a new type of MM, named Conical Swiss Rolls (CSR) has been proposed. These structures can serve as electromagnetic flux concentrators in the radiofrequency range. As a direct application, plates of composite materials with carbon fibers woven as reinforcement and polyphenylene sulphide as matrix with delaminations due to low energy impacts were examined. The evaluation method is based on the appearance of evanescent modes in the space between carbon fibers when the sample is excited with a transversal magnetic along z axis (TMz) polarized electromagnetic field. The MM lens allows the transmission and intensification of evanescent waves. The characteristics of carbon fibers woven structure became visible and delaminations are clearly emphasized. The flaws can be localized with spatial resolution better than λ/2000. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic representation of the Sensor with MM lens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The frequency dependence of effective permeability of conical Swiss roll.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Design of device for testing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The dependency by frequency of CSR impedance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Point spread function for MM lens: (<b>a</b>) calculated; (<b>b</b>) measured.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Studied samples: (<b>a</b>) Photo; (<b>b</b>) 5HS woven layout.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Sample impacted with 12 J energy: (<b>a</b>) front side; (<b>b</b>) back side—inset: breaking of fibers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The image through an aperture due Fresnel diffraction.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The measured signal delivered by the electromagnetic sensors with MM lens at scanning of composite FRPC quasi-isoptropic in plane samples impacted with 6 J energy (<b>a</b>) amplitude; (<b>b</b>) phase.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The measured signal delivered by the electromagnetic sensors with MM lens at scanning of composite FRPC quasi-isoptropic in plane samples impacted with 8 J, 10 J and 12 J energy (<b>a</b>) amplitude; (<b>b</b>) phase.</p>
Full article ">
2837 KiB  
Article
Smart Elasto-Magneto-Electric (EME) Sensors for Stress Monitoring of Steel Cables: Design Theory and Experimental Validation
by Ru Zhang, Yuanfeng Duan, Siu Wing Or and Yang Zhao
Sensors 2014, 14(8), 13644-13660; https://doi.org/10.3390/s140813644 - 28 Jul 2014
Cited by 51 | Viewed by 9736
Abstract
An elasto-magnetic (EM) and magneto-electric (ME) effect based elasto-magneto-electric (EME) sensor has been proposed recently by the authors for stress monitoring of steel cables with obvious superiorities over traditional elasto-magnetic sensors. For design optimization and engineering application of the EME sensor, the design [...] Read more.
An elasto-magnetic (EM) and magneto-electric (ME) effect based elasto-magneto-electric (EME) sensor has been proposed recently by the authors for stress monitoring of steel cables with obvious superiorities over traditional elasto-magnetic sensors. For design optimization and engineering application of the EME sensor, the design theory is interpreted with a developed model taking into account the EM coupling effect and ME coupling effect. This model is able to approximate the magnetization changes that a steel structural component undergoes when subjected to excitation magnetic field and external stress, and to simulate the induced ME voltages of the ME sensing unit located in the magnetization area. A full-scale experiment is then carried out to verify the model and to calibrate the EME sensor as a non-destructive evaluation (NDE) tool to monitor the cable stress. The experimental results agree well with the simulation results using the developed model. The proposed EME sensor proves to be feasible for stress monitoring of steel cables with high sensitivity, fast response, and ease of installation. Full article
Show Figures


<p>Schematic diagram of the proposed elasto-magneto-electric (EME) sensory system.</p>
Full article ">
<p>The simulated hysteresis loop of the descending part in the first quadrant under different stress levels obtained from solution of the model equations with <span class="html-italic">M</span><sub>S</sub> = 1.7 × 10<sup>6</sup> A/m, <span class="html-italic">a</span> = 1000 A/m, <span class="html-italic">k</span> = 1300 A/m, <span class="html-italic">α</span> = 1.0 × 10<sup>−3</sup>, <span class="html-italic">c</span> = 0.1, <span class="html-italic">E</span> = 2.0 × 10<sup>11</sup>, <span class="html-italic">r</span><sub>1</sub>(0) = 2 × 10<sup>−18</sup>, <math display="inline"> <semantics id="sm25"> <mrow> <msubsup> <mi>r</mi> <mn>1</mn> <mo>′</mo></msubsup> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>=</mo> <mn>3</mn> <mo>×</mo> <msup> <mrow> <mn>10</mn></mrow> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>26</mn></mrow></msup></mrow></semantics></math>, <math display="inline"> <semantics id="sm26"> <mrow> <msubsup> <mi>r</mi> <mn>2</mn> <mo>′</mo></msubsup> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>=</mo> <mn>1</mn> <mo>×</mo> <msup> <mrow> <mn>10</mn></mrow> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>30</mn></mrow></msup></mrow></semantics></math>, <span class="html-italic">r</span><sub>2</sub>(0) = 5 × 10<sup>−39</sup>, ξ = 162 × 10<sup>3</sup>.</p>
Full article ">
<p>The simulated relationship of magnetization and stress with <span class="html-italic">H</span> = 15 kA/m.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Structure of the EME sensor: <b>(a)</b> Longitudinal section; and (<b>b</b>) Cross-section.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Finite element simulation: <b>(a)</b> Geometrical graph; and <b>(b)</b> The simulation result of one case. <b>A</b> denotes the magnetic vector potential.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Schematic illustration of the ME sensing unit used in the EME sensor: <b>(a)</b> Photograph; and <b>(b)</b> Working principle, in which the arrows designate the directions of the magnetization (<span class="html-italic">M</span>) and polarization (<span class="html-italic">P</span>), respectively.</p>
Full article ">
<p>The performance tests of the ME sensing unit under pulse excitation: (<b>a</b>) The measured results by three methods under different input voltages <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>input</sub>; and (<b>b</b>) The relationship of <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>ME</sub> and <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>g, m</sub>. <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>ME, m</sub> is the peak value of <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>ME</sub> output from the ME sensing unit. <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>int, m</sub> represents the maximum value of the integral of the induced voltage output from a secondary coil. <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>g, m</sub> denotes the peak value of the signal from a gaussmeter.</p>
Full article ">
<p>The simulated relationship of stress and <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>ME, m</sub>. <span class="html-italic">V</span><sub>ME, m</sub> is the max value of signal output from the ME sensing unit.</p>
Full article ">
<p>The setup of the full-scale experiment for the performance tests of the EME sensor: (<b>a</b>) Photo; and (<b>b</b>) Schematic diagram.</p>
Full article ">
2807 KiB  
Article
Position-Controlled Data Acquisition Embedded System for Magnetic NDE of Bridge Stay Cables
by Rocio Maldonado-Lopez and Rouven Christen
Sensors 2011, 11(1), 162-179; https://doi.org/10.3390/s110100162 - 24 Dec 2010
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 11071
Abstract
This work presents a custom-tailored sensing and data acquisition embedded system, designed to be integrated in a new magnetic NDE inspection device under development at Empa, a device intended for routine testing of large diameter bridge stay cables. The data acquisition (DAQ) system [...] Read more.
This work presents a custom-tailored sensing and data acquisition embedded system, designed to be integrated in a new magnetic NDE inspection device under development at Empa, a device intended for routine testing of large diameter bridge stay cables. The data acquisition (DAQ) system fulfills the speed and resolution requirements of the application and is able to continuously capture and store up to 2 GB of data at a sampling rate of 27 kS/s, with 12-bit resolution. This paper describes the DAQ system in detail, including both hardware and software implementation, as well as the key design challenges nd the techniques employed to meet the specifications. Experimental results showing the performance of the system are also presented. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Sensing Technology for Nondestructive Evaluation)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">
<p>Inspection device developed at Empa [<a href="#b5-sensors-11-00162" class="html-bibr">5</a>,<a href="#b6-sensors-11-00162" class="html-bibr">6</a>].</p>
Full article ">
<p>Sensing and data acquisition system in the inspection device.</p>
Full article ">
<p>DAQ PCB Board.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Modules involved in data writing. Example of internal data buffer.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Example of event queue implemented in Slave micro-controller.</p>
Full article ">
<p>File header form in the device interface tool.</p>
Full article ">
<p>File header info displayed on data viewer tool together with the acquired data.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Multiple block write mode with pre-erase.</p>
Full article ">
<p>Single <span class="html-italic">vs</span>. multiple block write mode.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop