Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmmm

Research article

Analysis of the resolution of the passive magnetic method on the example of

nondestructive testing of steel wire ropes
Paweł Mazurek , Maciej Roskosz , Jerzy Kwaśniewski
AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics, 30 Mickiewicza Ave., 30-059 Krakow, Poland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Early identification of micro defects in steel wire ropes significantly impacts structures’ in-service reliability and
Diagnostics safety. The self-magnetic flux leakage (SMFL) method is a passive variant of the magnetic flux leakage (MFL)
Non-destructive testing method. The main difference is that the SMFL method relies on the self-magnetization of ferromagnetic material
Residual magnetic field
in a geomagnetic field, while the MFL method requires an externally formatted excitation source. Magnetic signal
Steel wire rope
inspection based on the self-magnetic flux leakage (SMFL) effect can effectively identify the location of defects.
Magnetic resolution
However, current research on the magnetic signal of defects under the influence of various factors needs to be
more comprehensive. However, no paper was found that compared different distances between discontinuities
and their magnetic resolutions. This work aims to analyze the resolution of the passive magnetic method on the
example of steel wire rope defect tests. The research was conducted with a sensor using the tunnelling
magnetoresistance (TMR) phenomena.

1. Introduction complicated to make a systematic classification of magnetic sensors.

Wire ropes are a load-bearing element in many rope-handling
equipment [1]. They perform a very responsible function and are
often a critical component of the entire system. Therefore, wire rope
diagnostics is a crucial issue. Steel wire ropes are subject to damage
during regular operation, which reduces their strength and threatens the
system’s safety. The most common reason for replacing wire ropes is
damage to only a specific section where the number of wire breaks ex­
ceeds the acceptable level [2]. Damages of steel ropes can be divided
into two groups: local break (LF - Local Fault/Local Flaw) and loss of
metallic cross-section (LMA - Loss of Metallic Area) [3]. LF is performed
as a short discontinuity in the wire rope, such as corrosion pitting, wire
breakage, welded wire or nicks between the strands. LMA is defined as
the change in the cross-sectional area expressed as a percentage of the
nominal metallic cross-sectional area relative to the new rope [4]. This
type of damage to steel ropes is described in detail in [5].
The primary non-destructive testing methods currently known and
used for wire-rope testing are magnetic flux leakage (MFL), acoustic
emission (AE),eddy current testing (ECT), ultrasonic guided waves
(UGWs), vision testing and radiography. Each method uses various
physical phenomena, and intensive research is conducted on every
method [6]. There is no doubt that magnetic methods are the most
popular among non-destructive methods for wire rope diagnostics. It is
According to [7], the most popular magnetic non-destructive testing
(NDT) methods have been divided into magnetic Barkhausen noise
(MBN),magnetic flux leakage (MFL) and metal magnetic memory
(MMM). From the practical point of view, it seems much more reason­
able to divide them into two groups: passive techniques using the test
object’s magnetic scattering field and active ones requiring the
magnetization of the test object with a strong external magnetic field.
The passive magnetic method is based on the self-magnetic flux
leakage (SMFL) principle, which works without actively magnetizing
the sample [8]. As the only external source, it uses the earth’s magnetic
field. In addition to the earth’s magnetic field, due to remanence and
stress magnetization, there are also internal sources of magnetization,
such as permanent magnetization [9,10]. The number of studies on the
passive magnetic method still needs to be improved due to some con­
troversy around this method. In work [11], the relationship between the
magnetic signal and the existing stress state was presented. In recent
years, interest in this method has been growing, as evidenced by the
rapidly increasing number of publications on the subject [12–15]. In
[16], a multisensor array was utilized to perform data fusion procedures
under various measuring conditions. The study was carried out for de­
fects with different depths and orientations about the magnetizing di­
rection, considering inspection data of defects in a circular-shaped tube
sample. The physical basis of this method has been successfully used for

E-mail address: pmazurek@agh.edu.pl (P. Mazurek).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2023.171607
Received 23 July 2023; Received in revised form 27 October 2023; Accepted 6 December 2023
Available online 10 December 2023
0304-8853/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
P. Mazurek et al.
Fig. 1. Cross-section and details of the measured steel wire rope.
the measurement of discontinuities [17] and also to measure stresses
[18,19]. Self-magnetic flux leakage can detect broken wires and assess
the strain in wire ropes due to bending. The results of the tests allow for
quantitative and qualitative assessment [20,21]. The magneto-
mechanical effect can be used for the non-destructive corrosion diag­
nosis of loaded rope structures. However, this method has limitations
like the uneven geomagnetic field distribution, the magnetization dif­
ference of various specimens and the lower magnetic signal data ca­
pacity [22].The [23] quantitatively measured the working stress of
reinforced concrete structures using magnetic signals. It provided a
novel method and idea for NDT but required further research. Achieving
magnetic shielding is essential in further conducting research [24]. In
the context of wire rope deposition criteria, it is vital to know the
number of defects on a given section of rope. None of the studies that
have been carried out, in terms of recording stresses due to bending of
wire ropes and mechanical discontinuities, have addressed the topic of
single damage resolution for this method, making qualitative and
quantitative analysis of the results difficult.
The purpose of the research carried out in this study is to determine
Fig. 2. Different structures of MR sensors [29].
Table 1
Characteristics of the sensor used.
Manufacturer’s Producer Measurement phenomenon used
designation
SpinMeter-3D USB 3 Axis Micro magnetoresistance tunnelling effect (TMR) and triaxial
Magnetometer Magnetics magnetometer based on quantum magnetic tunnel
(USA) junctions (MTJ)
2
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607
the zone of influence of single damage on changes in the magnetic
signature and the impact of closely located damage in terms of their
detection capabilities. This will be accomplished by creating mechanical
discontinuities along the wire rope for different geometric conditions:
the distance between the damage, the direction of the damage and the
location relative to the measuring sensor. The artificial defects were
performed sequentially. After each defect was made in the rope, a
measurement was carried out. The defects were located in different
positions on the rope’s circumference, and therefore in different posi­
tions relative to the sensor.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Examined object – Steel wire rope
The correlations described later in the article have been noticed for
many structures of the tested wire ropes – in this work is presented as a
representative sample. It is a steel rope with a diameter of 6 mm and
construction 6x19S + IWRC(7x7). The structure is often used in industry
- due to its flexibility, especially in personal lifts. The metallic cross-
section of the tested object is shown in Fig. 1.
The rope is 6 × 19 S + IWRC (7 × 7) construction. This means that
the rope consists of six strands of 19 wires each. The strands are of Seale
construction. Thomas Seale patented this design in 1855 in the USA. The
Seale strand is characterized by the fact that a layer of wires with smaller
diameters is laid directly on the core, and on it - another layer consisting
of the same number of wires with the same but much larger diameters
[25]. This causes an increase in fatigue resistance to bending and elas­
ticity. The independent wire rope core (IWRC) rope is also made of seven
strands, seven wires each.
2.2. Magnetoresistive sensor
A magnetoresistive (MR) sensor consists of first and second thin
layers of magnetic material separated by a layer of non-magnetic
metallic material. With the phenomena of the MR effect, various MR
sensors have been used in diagnostics, such as the GMR (giant magne­
toresistance) sensor, TMR (tunnel magnetoresistance) sensor and AMR
(anisotropic magnetoresistance) sensor based on the specific physical
phenomena [26]. The structures of three typical MR sensors are shown
schematically in Fig. 2. As for the sensors reported in the literature, the
Sensor characteristic Comments
Scale Sensitivity Noise
Range
±1000 0,10 µT 0,25 µT rms measures the value of
µT (minimum) magnetic induction in 3
axes
P. Mazurek et al.
Fig. 3. The general image of the measurement station.
Fig. 4. The actual image of the tested rope and the measuring sensor.
sensitivity is highest for GMI sensors [27]; the next are TMR, AMR, and
GMR sensors - significantly ahead of Hall sensors. Among MR sensors,
TMR sensors are effective the best [28].
The sensor used in this work is a low-power, 3-axis USB digital vector
triaxial magnetometer based on magnetoresistance tunnelling effect
(TMR) and quantum magnetic tunnel junctions (MTJ). Detailed char­
acteristics are shown in Table 1.
3. Experimental details
A general image of the measurement station is shown in Fig. 3. It is
made of non-magnetic aluminum profiles and contains a measuring
system and a rope sliding system relative to a stationary measuring
sensor.
Fig. 4 shows the actual image of the tested rope and the measuring
sensor. Whereas, Fig. 5 shows schematically the sensor with the mea­
surement axis system and the distance from the tested rope, which was 6
mm. The magnetic sensor was placed on a specially prepared stand. The
test range of the rope was 400 mm - in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 it is the section of
the rope between the red markers. The sensor was placed stably while
the rope was moved at approximately a speed. 3 mm/s. Different types
3
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607
of discontinuities were successively modelled on the rope, illustrated in
detail in Fig. 5 and described in Table 2. Discontinuities are identified by
their location on the x-axis denoted by a capital letter and their location
on the perimeter denoted by numbers – according to Fig. 5. The intro­
duction of each type of defect was marked with numbers from 1 to 7.
After introducing each defect, the signal for three components of mag­
netic induction was recorded. Fig. 6 shows the image of the introduced
discontinuities.
4. Results
Figs. from 7 to 13 show the distributions of the three components of
magnetic induction B along the rope for all three axes of the Cartesian
system: x, y and z, what is shown in Fig. 5. The components along the x
and y axes are the tangential components, with the component along the
z-axis being the normal component. These figures show changes in the
magnetic signature with a successively increasing number of artificially
introduced discontinuities - from a single discontinuity in Fig. 7 to all
discontinuities formed on the rope in Fig. 13.
The method of signal analysis proposed in the article is one of the
possible ones and does not exhaust the field of extraction of other
P. Mazurek et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Fig. 5. Schematic of the measurement system.

ΔExtPosBx when these changes were greater than 10 %.

Table 2 Discontinuities from D1 to D5, which are single transverse discon­
Description of modelled discontinuities. tinuities, cause changes in the distribution of magnetic field compo­
No. of Localization of No. of Description of discontinuities nents. These changes are not the same for each discontinuity; they are
defect defect (Fig. 5) Figure influenced, for example, by their position on the circumference of the
D1 I-1 Fig. 7 Single transverse damage to a rope, that is, by their relation to the measuring sensor. Discontinuity D6,
depth of about 1 mm which is a longitudinal discontinuity located on the opposite side to
D2 K-3 Fig. 8 Single transverse damage to a
discontinuity D1, is not visible in the distribution of components, while
depth of about 1 mm
D3 G-4 Fig. 9 Single transverse damage to a it caused a significant decrease in signal from discontinuity D1. A group
depth of about 1 mm of transverse discontinuities D7 perturbs the distribution of components,
D4 L-2 Fig. 10 Single transverse damage to a but due to their proximity to each other, they do not give single in­
depth of about 1 mm dications from each discontinuity. This indicates that in this case the
D5 B-1 Fig. 11 Single transverse damage to a
depth of about 1 mm
resolution of the measurement is insufficient, indications from individ­
D6 HJ-3 Fig. 12 Single longitudinal damage to a ual closely located discontinuities overlap.
depth of about 1 mm
D7 CF-1 Fig. 13 Four transverse defects to a depth 5. Conclusions
of about 1 mm

diagnostic features. For a single discontinuity, characteristic quantities
can be defined that quantitatively describe its magnetic signature.
Fig. 14 shows the parameters describing the differences in values be­
tween the extremes of all components (ΔExtBi = Bi_max - Bi_min, where i =
x, y, z) and between the positions of the extremes of the Bx component
(ΔExtPosBx = ExtPosBx2 - ExtPosBx1). A similar quantitative analysis,
however, on the effect of plastic deformation on the magnetic signature
was carried out in [30] obtaining interesting and quite unambiguous
results.
Based on the above-defined quantities, an attempt was made to
quantitatively describe the impact of sequentially appearing disconti­
nuities on the image of the magnetic signature obtained subsequently.
These results are included in Tables from 3 to 6. Tables from 3 to 6 show
trends in changes in values of ΔExtBx, ΔExtBy, ΔExtBz, ΔExtBz i
The test results show that each introduced defect causes a change in
the magnetic signature of the recorded signal. The most considerable
differences are noticeable in the quantitative evaluation for the Bx and Bz
components. The values of the By component also change, but the
changes are more diminutive. The resolution of the measurement
method used affects the detection of defects in wire ropes. Depending on
the location and number of closely spaced defects, their detection by the
passive magnetic method may be difficult or even impossible. The type
of damage - whether it is longitudinal or transverse - also has an influ­
ence. The study shows an influence of the magnetic signatures of indi­
vidual defects on the signatures of other defects. This influence can be
both quantitative and qualitative. Indicating a specific numerical
discontinuity value is complicated for situations with cumulative dam­
ages based on the magnetic signature alone. Still, nevertheless, it allows
us to indicate the dangerous area. This is particularly dangerous when

4
P. Mazurek et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Fig. 6. Image of the introduced discontinuities.

Fig. 7. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuity D1.

Fig. 8. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2.

5
P. Mazurek et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Fig. 9. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2, D3.

Fig. 10. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2, D3, D4.

Fig. 11. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2, D3, D4, D5.

6
P. Mazurek et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Fig. 12. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6.

Fig. 13. Distribution of magnetic induction components B along the measuring range – discontinuities D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7.

Fig. 14. Quantitative parameters describing the impact of a single discontinuity on the magnetic signature.

7
P. Mazurek et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607

Table 3 Table 6
Changes in induction component ΔExtBx. Changes in pick position ΔExtPosBx.
No. of defect No. of Changes in induction component ΔExtBx No. of defect No. of Changes in pick position ΔExtPosBx
Figure Figure
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7

D1 Fig. 7 50 – – – – – – D1 Fig. 7 30 – – – – – –
D1 + D2 Fig. 8 51≈ 24 – – – – – D1 + D2 Fig. 8 38↑ 26 – – – – –
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 9 40↓ 22≈ 12 – – – – D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 9 29↓ 33↑ 30 – – – –
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 10 36↓ 28↑ 11≈ 37 – – – D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 10 20↓ 40↑ 27↓ 63 – – –
+ D4 D4
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 11 41↑ 26≈ 10≈ 38≈ 26 – – D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 11 19≈ 39≈ 25↓ 65≈ 33 – –
+ D4 + D5 D4 + D5
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 12 28↓↓ 26≈ 10≈ 38≈ 26≈ ? – D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 12 18≈ 42≈ 23↓ 62≈ 30≈ ? –
+ D4 + D5 + D4 + D5 + D6
D6 D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 13 19≈ 40≈ ? 63≈ ? ? ?
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 13 28≈ 26≈ 10≈ 38≈ 27≈ ? ? D4 + D5 + D6
+ D4 + D5 + + D7
D6 + D7

acquisition.

Table 4 Declaration of competing interest

Changes in induction component ΔExtBy.
No. of defect No. of Changes in induction component ΔExtBy The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
Figure interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7
the work reported in this paper.
D1 Fig. 7 12 – – – – – –
D1 + D2 Fig. 8 12≈ 7 – – – – –
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 9 10↓ 11↑ 5 – – – – Data availability
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 10 10≈ 9↓ 5≈ 16 – – –
D4 The data that has been used is confidential.
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 11 10≈ 12↑ 4↓ 17≈ 4 – –
D4 + D5
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 12 10≈ 12≈ 4≈ 17≈ 4≈ ? – References
D4 + D5 + D6
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 13 10≈ 12≈ 4≈ 17≈ 10↑↑ ? ? [1] K. Feyrer, Wire Ropes: Tension, Endurance, Reliability. Berlin, New York, 2007.
D4 + D5 + D6 [2] Y. Yuan, K. Wang, B. Chen, Y. Qiu, Nondestructive testing of coal mine wire ropes
+ D7 based on magnetic sensors, Int. Trans. Elect. Energy Sys. 2022 (Oct. 2022)
e1066163.
[3] ‘EN 12927:2019 - Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry
persons - Ropes’, iTeh Standards. Accessed: Jan. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: htt
ps://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/392a2e7b-40c5-4aaa-97ba-b31
Table 5 653b7962e/en-12927-2019.
Changes in induction component ΔExtBz. [4] ‘ISO 4309:2017(en), Cranes — Wire ropes — Care and maintenance, inspection
and discard’. Accessed: Jan. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.iso.
No. of defect No. of Changes in induction component ΔExtBz org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:4309:ed-5:v1:en.
Figure [5] D. Kaur, R. Arora, S. Chhabra, and S. Sharma, ‘Characterization of LF and LMA
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7
signal of Wire Rope Tester’, International Journal of Advanced Research in
D1 Fig. 7 68 – – – – – – Computer Science, vol. 8, no. 5, Art. no. 5, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.26483/ijarcs.
D1 + D2 Fig. 8 63↓ 48 – – – – – v8i5.3803.
D1 + D2 + D3 Fig. 9 52↓ 44↓ 17 – – – – [6] P. Mazurek, A comprehensive review of steel wire rope degradation mechanisms
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 10 44↓ 44≈ 14↓ 60 – – – and recent damage detection methods, Sustainability 15 (6) (2023) 1–21.
D4 [7] Z.D. Wang, Y. Gu, Y.S. Wang, A review of three magnetic NDT technologies,
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 11 57↑ 39↓ 10↓ 57↓ 38 – – J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 324 (4) (Feb. 2012) 382–388, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmmm.2011.08.048.
D4 + D5
[8] P. Mazurek, M. Roskosz, Influence of the Earth’s magnetic field on the diagnosis of
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 12 26↓↓ 39≈ 10≈ 57≈ 33 ? –
steel wire rope by passive magnetic methods, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 547 (Apr.
D4 + D5 + D6
2022), 168802, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2021.168802.
D1 + D2 + D3 + Fig. 13 26≈ 39≈ ? 57≈ ? ? ? [9] A.A. Dubov, Development of a metal magnetic memory method, Chem. Petrol. Eng.
D4 + D5 + D6 47 (11) (2012) 837–839, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10556-012-9559-6.
+ D7 [10] A.A. Dubov, Detection of metallurgical and production defects in engineering
components using metal magnetic memory, Metallurgist 59 (1) (2015) 164–167,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11015-015-0078-5.
the magnetic signatures of two defects close to each other cancel each [11] L.J. Yang, B. Liu, L.J. Chen, S.W. Gao, The quantitative interpretation by
measurement using the magnetic memory method (MMM)-based on density
other out. Then, a larger loss in a metallic cross-section gives a weaker functional theory, NDT and E Int. 55 (Apr. 2013) 15–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/
signal than a smaller one. This phenomenon is due to the measurement j.ndteint.2013.01.002.
method in which only one magnetometer is used. The solution to this [12] Z. Li, S. Dixon, P. Cawley, R. Jarvis, P.B. Nagy, S. Cabeza, Experimental studies of
the magneto-mechanical memory (MMM) technique using permanently installed
problem is to thicken the number of magnetic field sensors around the
magnetic sensor arrays, NDT and E Int. 92 (2017) 136–148, https://doi.org/
perimeter of the rope, which will be the subject of further research. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2017.07.019.
[13] Z. Li, S. Dixon, P. Cawley, R. Jarvis, P.B. Nagy, Study of metal magnetic memory
CRediT authorship contribution statement (MMM) technique using permanently installed magnetic sensor arrays, AIP Conf.
Proc. 1806 (1) (Feb. 2017), 110011, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4974689.
[14] P. Shi, S. Su, Z. Chen, Overview of researches on the nondestructive testing method
Paweł Mazurek: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, of metal magnetic memory: status and challenges, J. Nondestruct. Eval. 39 (2)
Resources, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization. Maciej (2020) 43, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-020-00688-z.
[15] P. Shi, K. Jin, X. Zheng, A magnetomechanical model for the magnetic memory
Roskosz: Conceptualization, Validation, Writing – review & editing, method, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 124–125 (May 2017) 229–241, https://doi.org/
Supervision, Project administration. Jerzy Kwaśniewski: Conceptuali­ 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.03.001.
zation, Software, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing, Funding

8
P. Mazurek et al.
[16] G. Psuj, ‘Utilization of Multisensor Data Fusion for Magnetic Nondestructive
Evaluation of Defects in Steel Elements under Various Operation Strategies’,
Sensors, vol. 18, no. 7, Art. no. 7, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.3390/s18072091.
[17] X. Ma, S. Su, W. Wang, Y. Yang, S. Yi, X. Zhao, Damage location and numerical
simulation for steel wire under torsion based on magnetic memory method, Int. J.
Appl. Electromagn. Mech. 60 (2) (Jan. 2019) 223–246, https://doi.org/10.3233/
JAE-180075.
[18] S. G. Zhu, G. Y. Tian, and S. Q. Zhou, ‘Metal magnetic memory testing technique for
stress measurement’, 17th World Conference on Nondestructive Testing, 2008,
Accessed: Jan. 27, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://eprints.ncl.ac.uk.
[19] M. Roskosz, M. Bieniek, Analysis of the universality of the residual stress
evaluation method based on residual magnetic field measurements, NDT and E Int.
54 (Mar. 2013) 63–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2012.12.004.
[20] P. Mazurek, M. Roskosz, and J. Kwaśniewski, ‘Influence of the Size of Damage to
the Steel Wire Rope on the Magnetic Signature’, Sensors, vol. 22, no. 21, Art. no.
21, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22218162.
[21] P. Mazurek, M. Roskosz, J. Kwaśniewski, J. Wu, and K. Schabowicz, ‘Detecting
Discontinuities in Steel Wire Ropes of Personal Lifts Based on the Analysis of Their
Residual Magnetic Field’, Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 21, Art. no. 21, Jan. 2022, doi:
10.3390/su142114641.
[22] R. Xia, H. Zhang, Y. Xiao, L. Liao, J. Zhou, Theoretical analysis and experimental
verification of magneto-mechanical effect for loaded ferromagnetic structure with
initial corrosion, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 559 (Oct. 2022), 169541, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jmmm.2022.169541.
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 589 (2024) 171607
[23] Y. Gong, J. Zhou, R. Zhao, Y. Qu, K. Tong, Study on stress measurement for steel
bars inside RC beams based on self-magnetic flux leakage effect, J. Magn. Magn.
Mater. 562 (Nov. 2022), 169784, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2022.169784.
[24] X. Xu, W. Liu, Y. Huang, W. Li, S. Che, Magnetic shielding mechanism and structure
design of composites at low frequency: A review, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 570 (Mar.
2023), 170509, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2023.170509.
[25] A. Tytko, Liny stalowe: budowa, właściwości, eksploatacje, zastosowania,
Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN (2021).
[26] S. Hao, P. Shi, S. Su, T. Liang, A magnetic shielding strategy for magnetic sensor in
magnetic flux leakage testing, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 563 (Dec. 2022), 169888,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2022.169888.
[27] S. Pacheco, L. S. B. Cabrera, E. C. da Silva, and E. Costa Monteiro, ‘Design and
evaluation of closed-loop GMI magnetometer for biomedical applications’,
Measurement: Sensors, vol. 18, p. 100297, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.
measen.2021.100297.
[28] S. Willing, et al., Novel Tunnel Magnetoresistive Sensor Functionalities via
Oblique-Incidence Deposition, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 (27) (Jul. 2021)
32343–32351, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c03084.
[29] S. Bao, M. Fu, S. Hu, Y. Gu, and H. Lou, ‘A Review of the Metal Magnetic Memory
Technique’, Jun. 2016, p. V004T03A006. doi: 10.1115/OMAE2016-54269.
[30] K. Yao, B. Deng, Z.D. Wang, Numerical studies to signal characteristics with the
metal magnetic memory-effect in plastically deformed samples, NDT and E Int. 47
(Apr. 2012) 7–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2011.12.004.