Evaluation of a Magnetic Dipole Model in a DC Magnetic Flux Leakage System

被引:22
作者
Hosseingholizadeh, Samaneh [1 ]
Filleter, Tobin [1 ]
Sinclair, Anthony N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Mech & Ind Engn, Toronto, ON M5S 3G8, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Dipole model; magnetic flux leakage (MFL); nondestructive evaluation; surface charge; volume charge; FIELD; DEFECTS; METHODOLOGY; SIMULATION; SIGNAL;
D O I
10.1109/TMAG.2019.2897669
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
One of the most common methods for performing non-destructive testing in steel tank floors is DC magnetic flux leakage (MFL). The magnetic dipole method is the most widely used mathematical technique to predict the MFL from defects in such structures. However, due to the complexity of an exact analytical description of an MFL system, researchers often make coarse approximations for the profile of the magnetic surface charge density sigma(m), orientation of the magnetic field H, and variation of relative permeability mu(r). In this paper, the validity of these approximations is evaluated for 2-D rectangular defects in a steel plate, by comparing model predications with finite element results. The primary sources of deviation between the approximate solutions and true MFL profiles were found to be caused by assumptions that 1) sigma(m) on the specimen surface adjacent to a flaw is zero. This assumption is equivalent to treating the orientation of H to be parallel to the specimen surface, even at locations in close proximity to a flaw and 2) local variation in permeability around the defect can be ignored. This approximation was found to cause an underestimation of sigma(m) and, consequently, the predicted MFL. In contrast, approximating sigma(m) to be zero at the bottom of a flaw, and approximating uniform distribution for sigma(m) on the vertical defect sides of a slot defect was found to generate only minor errors in an estimate of flux leakage.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   A Space Mapping Methodology for Defect Characterization From Magnetic Flux Leakage Measurements [J].
Amineh, Reza K. ;
Koziel, Slawomir ;
Nikolova, Natalia K. ;
Bandler, John W. ;
Reilly, James P. .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, 2008, 44 (08) :2058-2065
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, THESIS
[3]  
Cheng D. K., 1989, FIELD WAVE ELECTROMA
[4]  
COMSOL Inc., COMSOL LIB NONL MAGN
[5]   Dipole Modeling of Magnetic Flux Leakage [J].
Dutta, Sushant M. ;
Ghorbel, Fathi H. ;
Stanley, Roderic K. .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, 2009, 45 (04) :1959-1965
[6]   THE MAGNETIC LEAKAGE FIELD OF SURFACE-BREAKING CRACKS [J].
EDWARDS, C ;
PALMER, SB .
JOURNAL OF PHYSICS D-APPLIED PHYSICS, 1986, 19 (04) :657-673
[7]   NEW FINDINGS IN THE FIELD OF NONDESTRUCTIVE MAGNETIC LEAKAGE FIELD INSPECTION [J].
FORSTER, F .
NDT INTERNATIONAL, 1986, 19 (01) :3-14
[8]  
Garcia D. M., 2015, THESIS
[9]   Experiment and simulation study of 3D magnetic field sensing for magnetic flux leakage defect characterisation [J].
Li, Yong ;
Wilson, John ;
Tian, Gui Yun .
NDT & E INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 40 (02) :179-184
[10]   Numerical simulation on magnetic flux leakage evaluation at high speed [J].
Li, Yong ;
Tian, Gui Yun ;
Ward, Steve .
NDT & E INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 39 (05) :367-373