Advertisement

Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 350–353 | Cite as

Detection of the Subsurface Cracks in a Stainless Steel Plate Using Pulsed Eddy Current

  • Duck-Gun Park
  • C. Sekar Angani
  • B. P. C. Rao
  • Gabor Vértesy
  • Duk-Hyun Lee
  • Kyung-Ho Kim
Article

Abstract

The nondestructive method to detect subsurface defects is limited because conventional eddy current are concentrated near to the surfaces adjacent to the excitation coil. The PEC technique enables detection of cracks buried deeper under the surface with relatively small current density. In the present study, an attempt has been made to investigate detection of subsurface cracks using a specially designed double-D differential probe. The tested sample is a SS304 with a thickness of 5 mm; small EDM notches were machined in the test sample at different depths from the surface to simulate the sub surface cracks in a pipe. The designed PEC probe has two excitation coils and two detecting Hall-sensors. The difference between two sensors is the resultant PEC signal. The cracks under the surface were detected using peak amplitude of the detected pulse; in addition, for a clear understanding of the crack depth, the Fourier transform is applied. In time domain, the peak amplitude of the detected pulse is decreased, and in the frequency domain, the magnitude of the lower frequency component has been increased with an increase in the crack depth. The experimental results have indicated that the proposed differential probe has the potential to detect the sub surface cracks in a stainless steel structure.

Keywords

Sub-surface cracks Pulsed eddy current Peak amplitude Fourier transform 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was developed by the research project on the development of prognostic diagnostic technique, as a part of nuclear R&D program supported by the ministry of education science and technology (MEST), Korea.

References

  1. 1.
    Udpa, L., Udpa, S.S.: Neural networks for the classification of non-destructive evaluation signals. IEE Proc., F, Radar Signal Process. 138(1), 201–205 (1991) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blitz, J.: Electrical and Magnetic Methods of Nondestructive Testing, p. 163. Chapman & Hall, London (1997) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    He, Y., Luo, F., Pan, M.: Defect characterisation based on pulsed eddy current imaging technique. Sens. Actuators A, Phys. 164, 1–7 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moulder, J.C., Bieber, J.A., Ward, W.W. III, Rose, J.H.: Scanned pulsed eddy current instrument for non-destructive inspection of aging aircraft. SPIE J. 2945, 2–13 (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kriezis, E.E., Tsiboukis, T.D., Panas, S.M., Tegopoulos, J.A.: Eddy currents: theory and applications. Proc. IEEE 80(10), 1559–1589 (1992) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rao, B.P.C., Raj, B., Jayakumar, T., Kalyanasundaram, P.: An artificial neural network for eddy current testing of austenitic stainless steel welds. NDT Int. 35, 393–398 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tian, G.Y., Zhao, Z.X., Baines, R.W.: The research of inhomogeneity in eddy current sensors. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 69, 148–151 (1998) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu, X., Luo, F.: Influence of different excitation parameters upon PEC testing for deep layered defect detection with rectangular sensor, computer. In: Int. Conf. on Mechatronics Controll and Electronic Engineering (CMCE), vol. 3, pp. 579–582 (2010) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abdin, I.Z., Mandache, C., Tian, G.Y., Morozov, M.: Pulsed eddy current testing with variable duty cycle on rivet joints. NDT Int. 42, 599–605 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Libby, H.L.: Introduction to Electromagnetic Non-Destructive Test Methods p. 157. Wiley, New York (1971) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Waidelich, D.L.: Pulsed Eddy Current testing of steel sheets, eddy current characterization of materials and structures. ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 722, 367 (1981) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    He, Y., Pan, M., Luo, F., Tian, G.: Pulsed Eddy Current imaging and frequency spectrum analysis for hidden defect nondestructive testing and evaluation. NDT Int. 44, 344–352 (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang, H.C., Tai, C.C.: Pulsed Eddy Current measurement of a conducting coating on a magnetic metal plate. Meas. Sci. Technol. 13, 1259–1265 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tian, G.Y., Sophian, A., Taylor, D., Rudlin, J.: Multiple sensors on pulsed eddy current detection for 3-D subsurface crack assessment. IEEE Sens. J. 5, 90–96 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Plotnikov, Y.A., Bantz, W.J.: Subsurface defect detection in metals with pulsed eddy current. Rev. Quant. Nondestruct Eval. 24, 447–454 (2005) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Angani, C.S., Pak, D.G., Kim, C.G., Leela, P., Kollu, P., Cheong, Y.M.: The pulsed eddy current differential probe to detect a thickness variation in an insulated stainless steel. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 29, 248–252 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Youhua, W., Junhua, W., Jiangui, L., Haohua, L.: Computational technologies in electrical and electronics engineering. In: Proc. of Int. Conf. on CTEEE, Novosibirsk, Russia, region 8, Sibircon, vol. 238 (2008) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, R.A., Hugo, G.R.: Deep corrosion and crack detection in aging aircraft using transient eddy current NDE. Rev. Prog. Quant. Nondestruct. Eval. 6A, 1401–1408 (1999) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duck-Gun Park
    • 1
  • C. Sekar Angani
    • 2
  • B. P. C. Rao
    • 2
  • Gabor Vértesy
    • 3
  • Duk-Hyun Lee
    • 1
  • Kyung-Ho Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.Nuclear Materials Development DivisionKorea Atomic Energy Research InstituteTaejonSouth Korea
  2. 2.Nondestructive Evaluation DivisionIGCARKalpakkamIndia
  3. 3.Research Center for Natural SciencesInstitute of Technical Physics and Materials ScienceBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations