See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/258259817

Discontinuity characterisation using electromagnetic methods

Article · September 2002

CITATIONS READS

6 1,294

2 authors, including:

Purna Chandra Rao Bhagi

Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research
274 PUBLICATIONS 2,005 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Purna Chandra Rao Bhagi on 01 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J of Non-Destructive Testing & Evaluation, Vol.2, No.2, September 2002, pp 23-29

CHARACTERISATION OF PHYSICAL DISCONTINUITIES

USING ELECTROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUES

B.P.C. Rao and T. Jayakumar

Division for PIE and NDT Development

Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research
Kalpakkam – 603 102, Tamil Nadu
Phone: + 91 4114 80208, Fax: + 91 4114 80356
e-mail: bpcrao@[Link]

ABSTRACT

Surface and sub-surface discontinuities significantly influence the integrity of an engineering

structure or component as compared to volumetric or buried ones. Reliable detection as well
as characterisation of discontinuities with respect to type, location, length, depth, width and
orientation, are envisaged by engineering industry to achieve high plant availability factors
and profitability. In this regard, role of non-destructive testing (NDT) is vital.
Electromagnetic non-destructive evaluation (NDE) techniques are widely used for detection
and characterisation of surface and sub-surface discontinuities in metallic materials. Three
most popular electromagnetic techniques viz. eddy current (EC), magnetic particle (MP) and
magnetic flux leakage (MFL) testing are covered in this paper and the discontinuity
characterisation capability of the three techniques is critically reviewed by placing due
emphasis on the latest state-of-the-art developments. Effort is made to clearly bring out the
capability and limitations of the techniques, primarily to enable selection of an appropriate
technique for a specific application. Defect detection and characterisation by
electromagnetic techniques requires considerable skill and experience. More recently, thrust
is being given to evolve operator-independent methods and schemes that enable automated
testing with capability for complete characterisation of discontinuities in components. These
aspects are also covered in the paper.

KEY WORDS: Electromagnetic techniques, eddy current testing, magnetic particle testing,
flux leakage, discontinuity characterisation.

1. INTRODUCTION

In the industrial scenario, with the incorporation of strategies such as total quality
management, structural integrity assessment and life assessment, the role of NDE is
becoming more vital. The prime objective of NDE is to detect physical discontinuities which
have a direct bearing on the usability of a component. NDE is mainly expected to perform
two main functions. Firstly, it must ensure reliable detection of defects and then secondly, it
must characterise type, location, length, depth, width and orientation of defects, so that the
influence of their presence in the component on its continuance of operation can be assessed
by fracture mechanics [1]. This requirement is placing a greater demand on the existing NDE
techniques or methods to detect defects during the initial stages of formation and growth with
high sensitivity and also to characterise the discontinuities with good reliability, repeatability
and high speed. While practising NDT, no region is left uninspected and no discontinuity
detected, however small, is left uncharacterised. It is no doubt to mention here that regions
which are exposed to high and alternating stresses, temperatures and hostile environments are
given the highest priority for investigation by NDT. Added to that, presence of a
discontinuity in those stress concentration regions drastically influences the structural
integrity of the whole component [2]. Once a discontinuity is detected by NDT, continuous
monitoring of the growth of the discontinuity is often sought to assess, e.g. the remaining
useful life of the component by fracture mechanics. Not only volumetric buried
discontinuities but also shallow surface and near surface discontinuities are targeted as they
influence the structural integrity significantly as compared to the volumetric ones.

The two generalised aspects in NDT for detection and characterisation of

discontinuities are: a) a discontinuity has to be reliably detected before it is characterised and
b) the NDT response of different discontinuities has to be different for successful
characterisation. In other words, a discontinuity detected is characterised for its details by
utilising the difference in the sensor response.

For NDE of surface and near-surface discontinuities in metallic materials,

electromagnetic techniques, namely Magnetic Particle (MP) testing, Magnetic Flux Leakage
(MFL) testing and Eddy Current (EC) testing, are widely practised [3]. While the MP and
MFL testing techniques involve monitoring leakage magnetic flux that arises due to defect in
a ferromagnetic material, the EC testing involves measurement of changes in impedance of a
coil (excited with sinusoidal alternating currents) due to discontinuity in material properties
of an electrically conducting material. With the field-discontinuity interaction being different,
the detection sensitivity and hence the capability, applicability, and versatility of the three
electromagnetic methods differ. This paper attempts to explain how discontinuity
(interchangeably referred to as defect, in this paper) characterisation is performed in these
techniques. Due emphasis is placed on the state-of-the-art developments in these techniques
and effort is made to clearly bring out the capability and limitations of the techniques,
primarily to enable selection of an appropriate technique for a specific application. No
emphasis is made to cover the principles, applications and limitations of the techniques as
they do not fall in the scope of the paper and they are discussed in detail elsewhere. Defect
detection and characterisation by electromagnetic techniques requires considerable skill and
experience. The dependence of operator is inevitable in these techniques. More recently,
thrust is being given to evolve operator-independent methods and schemes that enable
automated testing with capability for complete characterisation of discontinuities in
components. These aspects are also covered in the paper.

2. MAGNETIC PARTICLE (MP) TESTING

MP testing is simple and highly sensitive method that provides clear indications of
physical discontinuities in magnetic materials. In MP testing, the leakage fields arising from a
surface or near-surface (within 3 mm depth) discontinuity are detected and recorded by
sprinkling finely divided ferromagnetic powders either dry or wet [4]. MP tests are usually
performed as per ASME-Section V-Article 7, ASTM E1444-94a and ASTM E 709-95. A
component is usually magnetised in more than one direction and indications of discontinuities
are preserved by photography or video recording or by the use of peel-off transparent
adhesive films. Evaluation of length, width and lateral shape is carried out subsequently using
visual aids and other measuring techniques and more recently, using advanced image
processing methods. MP testing can be used for detection of cracks, blowholes, laps, non-
metallic inclusions, and segregation etc. The sensitivity of MP testing depends on the
magnetisation method and on the electromagnetic properties of the material tested as well as
on the size, shape and orientation of the defect.

In MP tests, utmost attention is paid for reliable detection of defects due to the
underlying fact - a defect detected is almost characterised to the maximum possible extent. In
other words, scope does not exist in MP tests to apply the signal processing methods for
enhanced detection and inversion methods for accurate characterisation of defects as
practised in ultrasonic, eddy current and other NDT methods. In light of this, magnetisation
methods, amperage, powders, carrier fluids, sprinkling methods, viewing conditions and
recording methods etc. are carefully tailored such that an existing defect (within the detection
limit of the test procedure) does not go undetected. For example, dry powder methods are
employed if large discontinuities (>1 mm), especially the sub-surface ones are expected. Red
coloured powders are preferred on dark surfaces and black coated powders on hot objects (up
to 400° C). On the contrary, to detect small and shallow surface defects such as tight fatigue
cracks, wet fluorescent methods with black light illumination are resorted to. The size of
powder has to be small in both dry (upto 150 microns) and wet (upto 25 microns) methods to
enable detection of smaller discontinuities by easy migration and build up of powder
particles. For the inspection of relatively inaccessible regions e.g. bolt holes and internal
threads, magnetic rubber inspection methods are employed. For under water inspections,
magnetic ink, putty, or tapes are used. Similarly, AC methods are ideal for detection of
shallow surface defects and DC or HWDC methods are preferred for near-surface defects.
Cleaning of component surface prior to testing is essential since detection sensitivity, hence
characterisation is impaired.

One major limitation of MP testing is the impossibility to characterise depth and

orientation of defects. For near-surface defects, the detection sensitivity decreases drastically
with the location from the surface. A fall out of these facts is the uncertainty that arises from
a large near-surface defect and a shallow surface defect. Usually, the surface defects are
characterised by diffused indications. To classify an indication into surface and near-surface,
other NDT methods such as visual testing are necessary. Realising this, automatic MPI
systems that use video cameras and image processing methods have been developed, e.g. for
inspection of turbine blade roots and rotor grooves [5].

It is commonly thought that MP testing is relatively a simple method and training is

usually overlooked. The consequences of such an assumption are missing of harmful defects
due to improper magnetisation/demagnetisation, inaccurate calibration of equipment,
inadequate illumination, inaccurate particle concentration, and misinterpretation. It is all the
more essential to use Gauss meters for measurement of magnetic fields, quality indicators
(shims) for controlling the field strength and verifying field direction and more importantly,
the Ketos ring for establishing the detection sensitivity. In nutshell, discontinuity detection by
trained operator following the optimised test procedure holds the key to efficient
characterisation of discontinuities by MP tests.

3. MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE (MFL) TESTING

In contrast to MP testing, the localised magnetic leakage fields are detected in MFL
testing using sensors such as inductive coils, Hall elements, magnetometers and
magetodiodes. Use of sensors in MFL testing enables automatic testing and evaluation
without human inspectors [6]. The sensor output depends on the size and orientation of the
defects as well as on the level of magnetisation and the inspection speed. MFL testing is
widely used for inspection of oil storage tank floors and pipes (internal/external), steel wire
ropes (ASTM-E-1571-93), under water structures and highly irregular components such as
helicopter rotor blade D-spars, gear teeth and artillery projectiles. Unlike in the MP tests, the
magnetisation levels are usually low and high strength rare earth magnets are commonly used
for magnetisation. Since magnetisation is local, demagnetisation is usually not required.
Nevertheless, the closer the magnetising field to saturation level, the more sensitive and
repeatable the MFL method becomes. The amount of leakage flux is dependant on depth,
orientation, type and position (top-side or bottom-side) of the defect, material permeability
and magnetisation level.

In general, the MFL unit comprising of magnets and sensors is scanned at uniform
speed and the sensor output is recorded continuously. ASTM-E-570 defines flux leakage
examination of ferromagnetic steel tubular products. The usual procedure for characterisation
involves generation of a master calibration graph between the sensor output and the size of
the calibration standard defects identical to the expected defects. Advances in sensor
technology and data acquisition and analysis have resulted in realisation of fully automated
MFL test stations that can achieve very high inspection speeds. MFL units can be portable,
battery-powered, and compact. For inspection of long oil pipelines, which run into a few
hundreds of kilometres, pipe inspection gauges (PIGs) housing the MFL units are widely
employed for detection and evaluation of corrosion damage. PIGs consist of as shown in
Fig.1 MFL unit, stand-alone battery supply, data analysis and processing computers and other
supporting electronics for acquiring and transmitting data to a remote log station, where
evaluation is carried out. MFL method is applicable to floor scanner applications involving
thickness upto 15 mm. More recently, development of saturation based low-frequency eddy
current methods that allow inspection upto 30 mm have been reported.

Selection of sensor is important as it decides the success of MFL testing. Though Hall
sensors are undeniably more sensitive than inductive coils for measurement of leakage fields,
they are too sensitive to surface conditions and hence, result in an unreliable inspection and
the generation of significant false calls. Hence, for the inspection of tubes, the preferred
sensor is the traditional coil due to stability and reliability [3,6]. When Hall sensors are used,
normal and tangential components of the leakage field can be detected by aligning the
sensing element parallel and perpendicular to the scanning surface, respectively.

In MLF testing, defects exhibiting various combinations of volume loss and through
wall dimension can give the same amplitude signal. Therefore, truly quantitative depth
information can not be obtained by this method. Variations in inspection speed and remnant
magnetisation produce eddy current noise and similarly, permeability variations and surface
roughness produce another kind of noise. By employing high-pass and low-pass filters with
suitable cut-off frequencies, noises can be eliminated to a maximum extent. It is interesting to
note that the amplitude and shape of MFL signal from a sensor-side defect is significantly
different from an equivalent other-side defect. For such situations, employing signal
processing and pattern recognition methods such as artificial neural networks and wavelet
networks ensure reliable detection and characterisation of defects. In case of oil and gas
pipelines, MFL signals are noted to be influenced by magnetic property variations, tool speed
and stress levels and hence, attention must be paid when reliable detection of a discontinuity
is envisaged in their presence [7].

Detection of defects in the presence of material variations, stresses, and surface

roughness is difficult. Unfortunately, there is no change in signal phase or shape as that is
noticed in the case of eddy current methods. Studies confirm that use of MFL in tandem with
ultrasonic and/or visual methods allows reliable detection and accurate sizing of defects
including discrimination of sensor-side and other-side defects. The use of MFL, visual, and
ultrasonic methods have prompted development of data fusion methods that, on one hand,
greatly enhance the probability of detection (POD) and on the other hand, enable complete
characterisation of discontinuities. In view of this, the widely followed philosophy is
employing variable threshold in MFL testing so that the most severe indications are chosen
for visual or ultrasonic testing for detailed characterisation.

4. EDDY CURRENT (EC) TESTING

EC testing involves measurement of change in coil impedance that arises due to

distortion of eddy currents by discontinuities in electrical conductivity and magnetic
permeability and correlation with the discontinuity characteristic. EC probes possess
directional properties i.e. regions of high and low sensitivity (impedance change). Defects
that cause maximum perturbation to eddy currents are detected with high sensitivity [8]. The
locus of impedance change during the movement of EC probe over the test material is called
the EC signal. While the amplitude of the EC signal provides information about the defect
severity, the phase angle provides information about the defect depth. Due to the skin effect,
with EC test one can readily detect the surface-breaking defects as compared to the sub-
surface defects or buried defects [9]. Selection of test frequency is very important in the EC
tests and in general, it is chosen such that a maximum amplitude signal is produced for
defects and with a good phase separation from the lift-off axis.

Usual test procedure for characterisation of physical discontinuities involves first

calibration. Artificial defects such as saw cuts, flat bottom holes, and electro-discharge
machining (EDM) notches are produced in a material with similar chemical composition and
geometry as that of the actual component. Well-characterised natural defects such as service
induced fatigue cracks and stress corrosion cracks are preferred, if available. The test
frequency, instrument gain and other instrument functions are optimised to detect all the
specified artificial defects using thresholding of appropriate EC signal parameters, e.g. signal
peak-to-peak amplitude, and phase angle. During actual testing, any region that produces
signals greater than the threshold is recorded defective. For detailed characterisation, master
calibration graphs, e.g. between EC parameters and defect sizes are obtained. Typical signals
from ASME calibration defects and the calibration graph for evaluation of wall loss in heat
exchanger tubes are shown in Fig.2. Detection and characterisation of defects under support
plate region requires multi-frequency EC testing, which involves mixing of eddy current
information to eliminate signals from disturbing variables [10].

For detection and characterisation of discontinuities in ferromagnetic tubes during

manufacturing stages, D.C. saturation methods are adopted to minimise the magnetic
permeability effects. However, for installed tubes, due to limitation of access for saturation
units, Remote Field (RF) method is preferred. This method is insensitive to permeability
variations and ensures linear relationship between wall-loss and the signal amplitude as well
as phase. Optimisation of excitation current frequency, amplitude and receiver location is
possible using finite element modelling. In this direction, the RF instrument and sensors
developed at the authors' laboratory could reliably detect 10% wall loss in modified 9Cr-1Mo
steam generator tubes (17.2 mm outer diameter and 2.3 mm wall thickness) of Prototype Fast
Breeder Reactor [11] .
 Detection and characterisation of defects in the presence of surface variations is
difficult using calibration graphs. Working in this direction, an artificial neural network
(ANN) method, which performs on-line multi-frequency multi-parameter EC testing has been
developed by the authors [12]. This method has been applied to the following practical
situations:

 Detection and characterisation of defects in stainless steel cladding tubes (outer diameter
5.1 mm, wall thickness 0.38 mm) with wall thickness variations formed during
manufacture
 NDE of stainless steel plates with variations in surface roughness, lift-of and material
properties
 Detection and characterisation of defects in austenetic stainless steel welds
 On-line detection and characterisation of cracks in stainless steel flanges

Due to skin effect, sub-surface and buried defects are detected with poor signal-to-
noise ratio. Recently, for such inspection needs, low-frequency and pulsed EC methods as
well as giant magnetic resistance (GMR) and super conducting quantum interference device
(SQUID) sensors are being explored world wide. One interesting application is non-contact
inspection of thermally insulated carbon steel components using pulsed eddy current method
for detection of corrosion / erosion under insulation and measurement of wall thickness
through coating or scaling. Further, data fusion methods which employ more than one EC
sensors to extract and fuse maximum possible information, are being tried out. In some
specific applications, high probability of detection (POD) and low probability of false calls
(PFC) have been demonstrated by these methods [13].

The widely used single-scan based EC methods are not sufficient for obtaining the
spatial information of defects. Although, sophisticated signal processing and pattern-
recognition methods provide some useful information, there is an established benefit if raster-
scan imaging is performed with one EC sensor and the resulting EC data is represented in the
form of an image. The image format provides comfortable interpretation enabling discern
irregularities in an image by comparing different regions. Further, the processed image and
the defect details provide an objective and documentable information that could, for example,
be used to monitor the growth of defects with time. More importantly, process automation is
possible since computers perform the raster-scan imaging and data processing. Imaging by
mechanical scanning of EC probe over the material surface is slow and influenced by
material variations and lift-off. For quick and automated EC testing of SS plates and welds,
an intelligent imaging scheme, which synergistically combines artificial neural network and
image processing methods, has been developed [14]. This scheme employs as depicted in Fig.
3, the following steps:

 imaging of pre-defined region at a coarse scan interval using a neural network trained
with linear and circular defects for mere defect detection purpose
 automatic identification of boundaries of all defects using an image processing method
called chain-code
 identification of defect shape (linear or circular) using the aspect ratio
 imaging only the defective regions at a fine scan interval using separate neural networks
for accurate depth quantification of linear and circular defects
 applying the image processing approach to fine-scan depth-profile images to restore the
images [15]
 Fusion of the restored and the depth-profile images to form a comprehensive three-
dimensional picture of defects and tabulation of defects in the imaged region

The coarse and fine scan intervals have been optimised as 1.0 and 0.3 mm, after
evaluating the probability of missing of defects and the imaging time, respectively [16]. The
capability of the intelligent imaging scheme has been demonstrated on austenitic stainless
steel plates for detection and accurate evaluation of length, width, depth and orientation of
defects (Fig. 4). The scheme has significantly reduced the imaging time by a ten-fold [15].
Further, the scheme has also been successfully applied to austenitic stainless steel welds for
successful EC testing in the presence of delta ferrite, surface roughness and variations in weld
material properties (refer Table–1) [17].

5. SUMMARY

The characterisation capability of the three electromagnetic NDT methods viz. MP,
MFL and EC are critically reviewed. The generalised philosophy of detection-before-
characterisation holds in these methods. All the three methods can be used for detection and
characterisation of surface and near-surface discontinuities. The comparative performance of
the three methods is given in Table 2. The depth of interrogation is about 3 mm for MP
method and it is nearly 10 mm for EC and MFL methods. While the MP and MFL methods
are suited on ferromagnetic materials, EC method is applicable for non-ferromagnetic
materials with the exception of RF method, which can be applied on ferromagnetic tubes.

Between the two magnetic methods, the MFL method has a definite edge over the MP
method, essentially because of the use of sensor for data recording enabling signal and image
processing for enhanced characterisation by manual as well as automated testing. As the
philosophy goes, a discontinuity detected by MP testing is almost characterised for its length,
width and lateral morphology. In light of this, instrument and test conditions are optimised
for maximisation of detection sensitivities.

For characterisation of defects in ferromagnetic tubes during manufacturing, D.C.

saturation EC method is ideal. However, for small diameter installed tubes, RFEC method
clearly stands out, but with reduced inspection speed due to the use of very low excitation
frequencies. When it comes to high inspection speed, and inspection of large diameter tubes,
the MFL method outperforms the RF method, as demonstrated in the case of oil-pipeline
inspection using PIGs. Similarly, for inspection of sub-sea structures, MP and MFL methods
are the clear choice.

In MFL and EC methods, quantification of defects is usually performed using master

calibration graphs. More recently, artificial neural network, wavelet transform, and other
signal processing methods have been developed with direct quantification capabilities,
despite the presence of noise. Such methods look very attractive for shop-floor applications
that aim complete elimination of operator induced errors and also for developing automated
testing stations. Further, use of imaging and data fusion concepts in EC and MFL methods is
increasing to meet the stringent demands of the industry to maximise the probability of
detection and to completely characterise physical discontinuities in components during their
manufacture as well as during their service life. Such concepts also help automate the testing
or inspection process and bring down the false alarms i.e. detecting a discontinuity that is
truly present.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The encouragement given by Dr. Baldev Raj, Director, Materials, Chemical and
Reprocessing Groups, IGCAR and Shri P. Kalyanasundaram, Head, DPEND, IGCAR is
gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Baldev Raj, T. Jayakumar and B.P.C. Rao, “Review of NDT techniques for structural
integrity”, Sadhana, Academy Proc. in Engineering Sciences. 20 (1995) 5-38.
2. R.W. Nichols, “Advances in NDE for structural integrity”, Applied Science Publishers,
London, 1982.
3. J. Bllitz, “Electrical and Magnetic Methods for Non-destructive Testing”, Adam Hilger,
Bristol.
4. D.J. Lovejoy, “Magnetic Particle Inspection: A practical guide”, Chapman & Hall, 1993.
5. J.S. Borucki, “Development of Automated Magnetic Particle Testing Systems”, Materials
Evaluation. 49 (1991) 324-329.
6. W. Lord, “Electromagnetic methods of Non-destructive Testing”, Gordon and Breach,
New York, 1985.
7. L. Clapham and D.L. Atherton, “Magnetic flux leakage inspection of oil and gas
pipelines”, J. of Non-destructive Evaluation (ISNT), 20 (2000) 40-45.
8. V.S. Cecco V.S, G. Van Drunnen and F.L. Sharp, “Eddy current manual : test method”,
Vol.1, AECL-7523, Chalk River, Ontario, November, 1981.
9. R.C. McMaster, P. McIntire and M.L. Mester (Eds.), “Non-destructive Testing
Handbook: Electromagnetic testing”, Vol. 4, ASNT, 1986.
10. L. de la Pintiere, “Multifrequency eddy current examination of heat exchanger tubing” in
“Electromagnetic Methods for Non-destructive testing”, Eds. W. Lord, Gordon and
Breach Science Publishers, New York, 1985, pp. 195-303.
11. In-service inspection of 9Cr-1Mo steam generator tubes of PFBR using remote field eddy
current method, Internal Report, DPEND, IGCAR.
12. B.P.C. Rao, Baldev Raj, T. Jayakumar and P. Kalyanasundaram, “Using artificial neural
networks to quantify discontinuities in eddy current testing”, Materials Evaluation. 60
(2002) 84-88.
13. [Link], “NDT Data Fusion”, Arnold, London, 1997.
14. B.P.C. Rao, Baldev Raj, T. Jayakumar and P. Kalyanasundaram, “An intelligent imaging
scheme for automated eddy current testing”, Non-destructive Testing & Evaluation. 17
(2001) 41-57.
15. B.P.C. Rao, Baldev Raj, T. Jayakumar, P. Kalyanasundaram and [Link], “A New
Approach for Restoration of Eddy Current Images”, Journal of Non-destructive
Evaluation. 20 (2001) 61-72.
16. B.P.C. Rao, “An intelligent imaging scheme for automated eddy current testing of
austenitic stainless steel plates and welds”. Ph.D. thesis, Saarland University,
Saarbruecken, Germany, 2000.
17. B.P.C. Rao, Baldev Raj, T. Jayakumar, P. Kalyanasundaram, W. Arnold and M.
Kroening, “An automated imaging scheme for quantitative non-destructive evaluation of
stainless steel plates and welds”, Proc. of Int. Conf. ISOMALM-2000, Kalpakkam, Oct.
2000, Vol.2, pp. 547-554.
Table 1 Results of application of the intelligent imaging scheme to austenitic stainless steel
welds consisting of EDM notches.

Actual dimensions Measured dimensions of

S. No. of the notch, mm notches from the fused images
formed after the intelligent
scheme, mm
1 Length 4.0 4.5
Width 0.3 0.6
Depth 0.6 0.58
2 Length 4.0 4.2
Width 0.3 0.6
Depth 0.8 0.74
3 Length 6.0 6.9
Width 0.3 0.9
Depth 0.4 0.42
4 Length 6.0 4.8
Width 0.3 0.3
Depth 0.6 0.58

Table 2 Comparison of MP, MFL, and EC methods for NDT of physical discontinuities.

Aspect MP method MFL method EC method

Discontinuity Length Possible Scope Exists Scope Exists

Discontinuity Width Scope Exists Scope Exists Scope Exists
Discontinuity Depth Not Possible Possible Possible
Discontinuity Orientation Not Possible Scope Exists Scope Exists
Resolution (lateral) Possible Scope Exists Scope Exists
Top-side/Bottom-side Not Possible Scope Exists Scope Exists
identification
Surface NDE Possible Possible Possible
Sub-surface NDE Scope Exists Scope Exists Scope Exists
Signal processing and Not Possible Scope Exists Possible
inversion
Numerical modelling Scope Exists Scope Exists Possible
Automation Scope Exists Possible Possible
High speed testing Scope Exists Scope Exists Possible
Fig. 1 Schematic of a typical PIG employed for inspection of oil and gas pipelines.

100

90

80
Discontinuity Depth, %

70

60

50

40

30

20

10
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Signal Phase Angle, deg.

Fig. 2 Typical eddy current signals from standard defects in ASME calibration tube.
A notch and a flat-bottom hole
(3X0.3X1.0 mm and 1.5 mm , 0.5 mm deep)
3

Fig. 3 The intelligent eddy current imaging scheme developed for quick and automated
detection and characterisation of discontinuities.
 0.0

0.2

0.4

Depth, mm
0.6

0.8

20 0
15 10
10 20
YA
xis 5 30 , mm
, mm xis
0 40 XA

Fig.4. Results of application of the imaging scheme to a stainless steel plate consisting of a
notch (length 3 mm, width 0.3 mm and depth 0.8 mm) and a flat bottom hole (diameter 1.5
mm and depth 0.5 mm). The scheme has automatically chosen separate neural networks for
the fine scan imaging of notch and hole regions because of the difference in the aspect ratio.

View publication stats