Advantages and Limitations of Eddy Current Inspection

Eddy current inspection is extremely versatile, which is both an advantage and a disadvantage. The
advantage is that the method can be applied to many inspection problems provided the physical
requirements of the material are compatible with the inspection method. In many applications, however,
the sensitivity of the method to the many properties and characteristics inherent within a material can be a
disadvantage; some variables in a material that are not important in terms of material or part serviceability
may cause instrument signals that mask critical variables or are mistakenly interpreted to be caused by
critical variables.

Eddy Current Versus Magnetic Inspection Methods. In eddy current inspection, the eddy
currents create their own electromagnetic field, which can be sensed either through the effects of the field
on the primary exciting coil or by means of an independent sensor. In nonferromagnetic materials, the
secondary electromagnetic field is derived exclusively from eddy currents. However, with ferromagnetic
materials, additional magnetic effects occur that are usually of sufficient magnitude to overshadow the
field effects caused by the induced eddy currents. Although undesirable, these additional magnetic effects
result from the magnetic permeability of the material being inspected and can normally be eliminated by
magnetizing the material to saturation in a static (direct current) magnetic field. When the permeability
effect is not eliminated, the inspection method is more correctly categorized as electromagnetic or
magnetoinductive inspection. Methods of inspection that depend mainly on ferromagnetic effects are
discussed in the article "Magnetic Particle Inspection" in this Volume.

Ultrasonic Inspection Advantages and Disadvantages The principal

advantages of ultrasonic inspection as compared to other methods for nondestructive inspection of metal
parts are: Superior penetrating power, which allows the detection of flaws deep in the part.
Ultrasonic inspection is done routinely to thicknesses of a few meters on many types of parts and
to thicknesses of about 6 m (20 ft) in the axial inspection of parts such as long steel shafts or
rotor forgings High sensitivity, permitting the detection of extremely small flaws Greater
accuracy than other nondestructive methods in determining the position of internal flaws,
estimating their size, and characterizing their orientation, shape, and nature Only one surface
needs to be accessible Operation is electronic, which provides almost instantaneous indications
of flaws. This makes the method suitable for immediate interpretation, automation, rapid
scanning, in-line production monitoring, and process control. With most systems, a permanent
record of inspection results can be made for future reference Volumetric scanning ability,
enabling the inspection of a volume of metal extending from front surface to back surface of a
part Nonhazardous to operations or to nearby personnel and has no effect on equipment and
materials in the vicinity Portability Provides an output that can be processed digitally by a
computer to characterize defects and to determine material properties The disadvantages of
ultrasonic inspection include the following: Manual operation requires careful attention by
experienced technicians Extensive technical knowledge is required for the development of
inspection procedures Parts that are rough, irregular in shape, very small or thin, or not
homogeneous are difficult to inspect Discontinuities that are present in a shallow layer
immediately beneath the surface may not be detectable Couplants are needed to provide
effective transfer of ultrasonic wave energy between transducers and parts being inspected
Reference standards are needed, both for calibrating the equipment and for characterizing flaws
Sensitivity, or the ability of an ultrasonic inspection system to detect a very small discontinuity, is
generally increased by using relatively high frequencies (short wavelengths). Resolution, or the ability of
the system to give simultaneous, separate indications from discontinuities that are close together both in
depth below the front surface of the testpiece and in lateral position, is directly proportional to frequency
band-width and inversely related to pulse length. Resolution generally improves with an increase of
frequency. Penetration, or the maximum depth (range) in a material from which useful indications can be
detected, is reduced by the use of high frequencies. This effect is most pronounced in the inspection of
metal that has coarse grain structure or minute inhomogeneities, because of the resultant scattering of the
ultrasonic waves; it is of little consequence in the inspection of fine-grain, homogeneous metal. Loss of
Back Reflection. Angle-beam techniques or other nondestructive inspection methods can then be used
for positive identification of the flaw. However, if the back reflection remains relatively steady as the
search unit is moved but the amplitude of the indication is measurably lower than the expected or
standard value, the material presumably contains many small flaws distributed over a relatively broad
region. This material condition may or may not be amenable to further study using other ultrasonic
techniques or other nondestructive methods.

Scattering of an ultrasonic wave occurs because most materials are not truly homogeneous. Crystal
discontinuities, such as grain boundaries, twin boundaries, and minute nonmetallic inclusions, tend to
deflect small amounts of ultrasonic energy out of the main ultrasonic beam. In addition, especially in
mixed microstructures or anisotropic materials, mode conversion at crystallite boundaries tends to occur
because of slight differences in acoustic velocity and acoustic impedance across the boundaries.
Scattering is highly dependent on the relation of crystallite size (mainly grain size) to ultrasonic
wavelength. When grain size is less than 0.01 times the wavelength, scatter is negligible. Scattering
effects vary approximately with the third power of grain size, and when the grain size is 0.1 times the
wavelength or larger, excessive scattering may make it impossible to conduct valid ultrasonic inspections.
In some cases, determination of the degree of scattering can be used as a basis for acceptance or rejection
of parts. Some cast irons can be inspected for the size and distribution of graphite flakes, as described in
the section "Determination of Microstructural Differences" in this article. Similarly, the size and
distribution of microscopic voids in some powder metallurgy parts, or of strengtheners in some fiber-
reinforced or dispersion-strengthened materials, can be evaluated by measuring attenuation (scattering) of
an ultrasonic beam.

Spurious indications interference occurs when coarse-grain materials are inspected. Reflections from
the grain boundaries of coarse-grain materials can produce spurious indications throughout the test depth
(Fig. 16). This type of interference, called hash, is most often encountered in coarse-grain steels; it is less
troublesome with fine-grain steels or nonferrous metals. Sometimes, hash can be suppressed by adjusting
the frequency and pulse length of the ultrasonic waves so that the sound beam is less sensitive to grain-
boundary interfaces.

Reference blocks On the screen, the height of the echo indication from a hole varies with the distance
of the hole from the front (entry) surface in a predictable manner based on near-field and far-field effects,
depending on the test frequency and search-unit size, as long as the grain size of the material is not large.
Where grain size is large, this normal variation can be altered. Figure 44 shows the differences in
ultrasonic transmissibility that can be encountered in reference blocks of a material with two different
grain sizes. It can be seen in Fig. 44 that for the austenitic stainless steel inspected, increasing the grain
size affected the curve of indication height versus distance from the entry surface so that the normal
increase in height with distance in the near field did not occur. This was caused by rapid attenuation of
ultrasound in the large-grain stainless steel. In some cases where the grain size is quite large, it may not
even be possible to obtain a back reflection at normal test frequencies.

In the inspection of aluminum, a single set of reference blocks can be used for most parts regardless of
alloy or wrought mill product. This is considered acceptable practice because ultrasonic transmissibility is
about the same for all aluminum alloy compositions. For ferrous alloys, however, ultrasonic
transmissibility can vary considerably with composition. Consequently, a single set of reference blocks
cannot be used when inspecting various products made of carbon steels, stainless steels, tool steels, low-
alloy steels, and high-temperature alloys. For example, if a reference block prepared from fine-grain steel
were used to set the level of test sensitivity and the material being inspected were coarse grained, flaws
could be quite large before they would yield an indication equal to that obtained from the bottom of the
hole in the reference block. Conversely, if a reference block prepared from coarse-grain steel were used
when inspecting fine-grain steel, the instrument could be so sensitive that minor discontinuities would
appear to be major flaws. Thermal treatment can also have an appreciable effect on the ultrasonic
transmissibility of steel. For this reason, the stage in the fabrication process at which the ultrasonic
inspection is performed may be important. In some cases, it may determine whether or not a satisfactory
ultrasonic inspection can be performed. Reference blocks are generally used to adjust the controls of the
ultrasonic instrument to a level that will detect flaws having amplitudes above a certain predetermined
level. It is usual practice to set instrument controls to display a certain amplitude of indication from the
bottom of the hole or from the notch in a reference block and to record and evaluate for accept/reject
indications exceeding that amplitude, depending on the codes or applicable standards. The diameter of the
reference hole and the number of flaw indications permitted are generally related to performance
requirements for the part and are specified in the applicable codes or specifications. The following should
be considered when setting controls for inspection: The larger the section or testpiece, the greater
the likelihood of encountering flaws of a particular size Flaws of a damaging size may be
permitted if found to be in an area that will be subsequently removed by machining or that is not
critical It is generally recognized that the size of the flaw whose echo exceeds the rejection
level usually is not the same as the diameter of the reference hole. In a reference block, sound is
reflected from a nearly perfect flat surface represented by the bottom of the hole. In contrast,
natural flaws are usually neither flat nor perfectly reflecting The material being inspected may
conduct sound differently from the material of the reference block. Normally, a reference block
will be made from material of the same general type as that being inspected The depth of a flaw
from the entry surface will influence the height of its echo that is displayed on the oscilloscope
screen. Figure 45 shows the manner in which echo height normally varies with flaw depth. Test
blocks of several lengths are used to establish a reference curve for the distance-amplitude
correction of inspection data

Percentage of Back Reflection. As an alternative to reference blocks, an internal standard can be

used. In this technique, the search unit is placed over an indication-free area of the part being inspected,
the instrument controls are adjusted to obtain a predetermined height of the first back reflection, and the
part is evaluated on the basis of the presence or absence of indications that equal or exceed a certain
percentage of this predetermined amplitude. This technique, known as the percentage of back reflection
technique, is most useful when lot-to-lot variations in ultrasonic transmissibility are large or
unpredictable--a condition often encountered in the inspection of steels. The size of a flaw that produces a
rejectable indication will depend on grain size, depth of the flaw below the entry surface, and test
frequency. When acceptance or rejection is based on indications that equal or exceed a specified
percentage of the back reflection, rejectable indications may be caused by smaller flaws in coarse-grain
steel than in finegrain steel. This effect becomes less pronounced, or is reversed, as the transducer
frequency and corresponding sensitivity necessary to obtain a predetermined height of back reflection are
lowered. Flaw evaluation may be difficult when the testpiece grain size is large or mixed. Generally,
metallurgical structure such as grain size has an effect on ultrasonic transmissibility for all metals. The
significantly large effect shown in Fig. 44 for type 304 stainless steel is also encountered in other
materials. The magnitude of the effect is frequency dependent, that is, the higher the test frequency, the
greater the attenuation of ultrasound. In any event, when the grain size approaches ASTM No. 1, the
effect is significant regardless of alloy composition or test frequency.

Inspection of Castings Both contact inspection and immersion inspection are used to detect in
castings such flaws as porosity, tears and cracks, shrinkage, voids, and inclusions. Figure 52 illustrates
typical ultrasonic indications from four types of flaws found in castings. Although immersion inspection
is preferred for castings having rough and irregular surfaces, any one of the inspection techniques
previously described can be used. The choice of technique in a specific instance will depend mainly on
casting size and shape. Because many castings are coarse grained, low-frequency ultrasound may have to
be used. Castings of some materials are so coarse grained that extensive scattering makes ultrasonic
inspection impractical. These materials include some brasses, stainless steels, titanium alloys, and cast
irons. A more extensive discussion is provided in the article "Castings" in this Volume.
Determination of Microstructural Differences Ultrasonic methods can be used to
determine microstructural differences in metals. For this, contact testing with the pulse-echo technique is
used. The testing can be either the measurement of ultrasonic attenuation or the measurement of bulk
sound velocity.
The attenuation method is based on the decay of multiple echoes from testpiece surfaces. Once a
standard is established, other testpieces can be compared to it by comparing the decay of these echoes to
an exponential curve. This test is especially suited for the microstructural control of production parts, in
which all that is necessary is to determine whether or not the parts conform to a standard. An example of
the use of ultrasonic attenuation in the determination of differences in microstructure is the control of
graphite-flake size in gray iron castings, which in turn controls tensile strength. In one application, a
water-column search unit that produced a pulsed beam with a frequency of 2.25 MHz was used to test
each casting across an area of the casting wall having uniform thickness and parallel front and back
surfaces. A test program had been first carried out to determine the maximum size of graphite flakes that
could be permitted in the casting and still maintain a minimum tensile strength of 200 MPa (30 ksi).
Then, ultrasonic tests were made on sample castings to determine to what intensity level the second back
reflection was lowered by the attenuation effects of graphite flakes larger than permitted. Next, a gate was
set on the ultrasonic instrument in the region of the second back reflection, and an alarm was set to signal
whenever the intensity of this reflection was below the allowable level. The testing equipment was then
integrated into an automatic loading conveyor, where the castings were 100% inspected and passed or
rejected before any machining operation.

Velocity Measurements. When considering the compressional and shear wave velocities given in
Table 1, there may be small deviations for crystalline materials because of elastic anisotropy. This is
important and particularly evident in copper, brass, and austenitic steels. The following example
illustrates the variation of sound velocity with changes in the microstructure of leaded free-cutting brass.