Eddy Current Tomography
In eddy current tomography, the conductivity profile of conductive materials is reconstructed through the inversion of eddy current data (ECT). The state of the art of imaging methods in ECT data inversion is represented by iterative methods, the drawbacks of which are their high computational cost and the risk of becoming trapped in false solutions (local minima). In this chapter, we discuss the “Monotonicity Principle Method,” a fast non-iterative approach recently developed for elliptic problems (such as electrical resistance tomography) and then extended to parabolic problems (such as eddy current tomography) and hyperbolic problems (such as microwave tomography).
This chapter discusses the main features of the Monotonicity Principle in eddy current testing. Specifically, section “Monotonicity Principle for Eddy Current Imaging in the Large Skin-Depth Regime” discusses the Monotonicity Principle for eddy current testing in the “large” skin-depth regime, then section “Imaging Method” introduces the related imaging method (Monotonicity Principle Imaging Method, MPIM), and section “Monotonicity Principle for Eddy Currents in Other Settings” introduces other setting where Monotonicity Principle holds and MPIM can be applied.
- Aykroyd RG, Soleimani M, Lionheart WRB (2005) Full shape reconstruction from partial ERT monotonicity information using a Bayes-MCMC approach. In: Proceedings of the 4th world congress in industrial process tomography, International Society for Industrial Process Tomography, Japan, pp 697–702Google Scholar
- Calvano F, Caturano G, Cavaccini G, Rubinacci G, Tamburrino A, Ventre S (2010) Crack shape reconstruction from ect using topology constrained optimization (TOPCSA) algorithms. Stud Appl Electromagn Mech 33:230–237Google Scholar
- Devaney AJ (2000) Super-resolution processing of multi-static data using time reversal and music. Northeastern University Preprint. http://ece.neu.edu/fac-ece/devaney/preprints/paper02n_00.pdf
- Flores-Tapia D, Pistorius S (2010) Electrical impedance tomography reconstruction using a monotonicity approach based on a priori knowledge. In: 2010 Annual international conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC’10, pp 4996–4999Google Scholar
- Lionheart WRB, Soleimani M, Peyton AJ (2003) Sensitivity analysis of 3D magnetic induction tomography (MIT). In: Proceedings of the 3rd world congress on industrial process tomography, International Society for Industrial Process Tomography, Canada, pp 239–244Google Scholar
- Su Z, Udpa L, Giovinco G, Ventre S, Tamburrino A (2017a) Monotonicity principle in pulsed eddy current testing and its application to defect sizing. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society (ACES) symposium, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Italy, pp 1–2Google Scholar
- Su Z, Ye C, Giovinco G, Ventre S, Udpa L, Tamburrino A (2018) Evaluation of electrical conductivity of metals via monotonicity of time constants. Stud Appl Electromagn Mech 43:88–95Google Scholar
- Tamburrino A, Barbato L, Colton D, Monk P (2015) Imaging of dielectric objects via monotonicity of the transmission eigenvalues. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on mathematical and numerical aspects of wave propagation, Karlsruhe, pp 99–100Google Scholar
- Tamburrino A, Vento A, Ventre S, Maffucci A (2016) Monotonicity imaging method for flaw detection in aeronautical applications. Stud Appl Electromagn Mech 41:284–292Google Scholar
- Yamamoto M (1997) A mathematical aspect of inverse problems for non-stationary Maxwell’s equations. Int J Appl Electromagn Mech 8(1):77–98Google Scholar