Comprehensive study on radial coil influence in designing segmented remote field eddy current probe for defect detection in ferromagnetic tubes

References

• Winston revie. Oil and gas pipelines integrity and safety handbook. New Jersey, US: John Wiley & Sons; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford AH. Non-destructive testing of nuclear power reactor components. Non-Destruct Test. 1970;3(3):217–219.
   Google Scholar
• Shull Peter J. Nondestructive evaluation theory, techniques, and applications. 4th ed. New York: CRC Press; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Georgiou GA. Non-destructive testing and evaluation of metals. Mater Sci Eng. 2011 3 .
   Google Scholar
• García-Martín J, Gómez-Gil J, Vázquez-Sánchez E. Non-Destructive techniques based on eddy current testing. Sensors. 2011;11(3):2525–2565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahr AJ, Auld BA. An electromagnetic model for eddy-current imaging. J Nondestructive Eval. 1988;7(1–2):71–77.
   Google Scholar
• Rao BPC, Raj B, Jayakumar T, et al. An artificial neural network for eddy current testing of austenitic stainless steel weld. NDT E Int. 2002;35(6):393–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thirunavukkarasu S. Remote field eddy current based approaches for high sensitive detection of defects in ferromagnetic steam generator tubes [dissertation]. Mumbai: Homi Bhaba National Institute; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt TR, Atherton DL, Sullivan S. The remote field transition zone. Mater Eval. 1989;47:969–979.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atherton DL, Mergelas BJ. Remote field eddy current inspection. Am Soc Nondestruct Test. 1995;31(6).
   Google Scholar
• She S, Chen Y, Yunze H, et al. Optimal design of remote field eddy current testing probe for ferromagnetic pipeline inspection. Measurement. 2021;168:108306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atherton DL, Sullivan S, Daly M. A remote field eddy current tool for inspecting nuclear reactor pressure tubes. Brit J Nondestr Test. 1988;30(1):22–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falque R, Vidal-Calleja T, Miro JV, et al. Background segmentation to enhance remote field eddy current signals. Proceedings of Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2014 Dec 2-4; Melbourne (Australia).
   Google Scholar
• Teitsma A, Takach S, Maupin J, et al. Small diameter remote field eddy current inspection for unpiggable pipelines. J Press Vess-T ASME. 2005;127(3):269–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin SYS, Lin HY, Chen MJ, et al. Finite element modelling and physics of remote field eddy current responses for axially aligned cracks. IEEE Trans Magn. 1992;28(4):1941–1947.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mergelas BJ, Atherton DL. Anomalous models of defect interactions in electromagnetic testing. Rev Prog Q. 1995;14.
   Google Scholar
• Atherton DL. Remote field eddy current inspection. IEEE Trans Magn. 1995;31(6):4142–4147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith S, Atherton DL. Longitudinal AC interactions with axial slits in steel pipes. Res Nondestruct Eval. 1996;7:203–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim YJ, Lee SS. Eddy current probes of inclined coils for increased detectability of circumferential cracks in tubing. NDT E Int. 2012;49:77–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Junjun X, Naiguang U, Udpa L, et al. Rotating field eddy current probe with bobin pickup coil for steam generator tubes inspection. NDT E Int. 2013;54:45–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo Q, Shi Y, Wang Z. Method for removing secondary peaks in remote field eddy current testing of pipes. J Nondestruct Eval. 2017;36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo QW, Shi YB, Wang ZG, et al. Approach for removing ghost-images in remote field eddy current testing of ferromagnetic pipes. Rev Sci Instrum. 2016;87:10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun H, Shi Y, Gao X, et al. Secondary peak separation of remote field eddy current testing in ferromagnetic pipes. IEEE IMTC P. 2019;1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Thirunavukkarasu S, Rao BPC, Mahadevan S, et al. Three-Dimensional finite element modeling of remote field eddy current technique for detection of localized defects. Res Nondestr Eval. 2009;20(3):145–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun LW, Shi Y, Udpa SS, et al. A finite element study of the remote field eddy current phenomenon. IEEE Trans Magn. 1988;24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park JW, Park JH, Song SJ, et al. Enhanced detection of defects using GMR sensor based remote field eddy current technique. J Magn. 2017;22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan X, Zhang J, Zhou S, et al. Probabilistic modelling and sizing of embedded flaws in ultrasonic non-destructive inspections for fatigue damage prognostics and structural integrity assessment. NDT E Int. 2014;61:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajesh SN, Udpa L, Udpa S, et al. Probability of detection (POD) models for eddy current NDE methods. Rev Prog Q Adv Cryogen Eng. 1992;28:265–272.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley K, Cheng Y. Estimation of and confidence interval formation for reliability coefficients of homogeneous measurement instruments. Methodol Eur. 2011;8(2):39–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of defense handbook (USA) non destructive evaluation system reliability assessment; 2009. (MIL-HDBK-1823A).
   Google Scholar
• Bato MR, Hor A, Rautureau A, et al. Impact of human and environmental factors on the probability of detection during NDT control by eddy currents. Measurement. 2019;133:222–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berens AP. NDE reliability data analysis. In ASM metals handbook: nondestructive evaluation and quality control. Am Soc Metals Int. 1989;17:689–701.
   Google Scholar
• Soni AK, Thirunavukkarasu S, Sasi B, et al. Development of high sensitivity eddy current instrument for the detection of subsurface defects in stainless steel plates. J Nondestructive Test. 2015;57:508–512.
   Google Scholar
• Thirunavukkarasu S, Arjun V, Purna Chandra Rao B, et al. Development of high sensitive dual frequency remote field eddy current instrumentation for inspection of ferromagnetic steam generator tubes. IETE Tec Rev. 2019;36(2):203–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasan F, Iqbal J, Ahmed F. Stress-corrosion failure of high-pressure gas pipeline. Eng Fail Anal. 2007;14(5):801–809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berchmans LJ, Muralidharan S, Rangaswamy NS, et al. Stress-corrosion cracking and hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility studies on modified 9Cr-1Mo steel weldments in acidic and neutral media. J British Corros. 1996;31(3):223–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noritaka Y, Knoop JS. Evaluation of Probability of detection (POD) studies with multiple explanatory variables. J Nuclear Sci Tech. 2016;53(4):574–579.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar