Abstract

The magnetic flux leakage (MFL) technique is most commonly used for crack detection from iron bars, laminated sheets, and steel tubes of ferromagnetic nature. Magnetic flux leakage system induces a magnetic field and detects magnetic flux lines that “leak” or change because of a discontinuity in the magnetized area. An inductive coil sensor or a Hall effect sensor detects the leakage. Magnetic methods of nondestructive testing (NDT) depend on detecting this magnetic flux leakage field. The ferromagnetic specimen is magnetized by suitable methods, and flaws which break the surface or just the subsurface distort the magnetic field, causing local flux leakage fields. It is very important for industrial applications to detect cracks and flaws in metal parts of the steel bridges, power stations, military tools and structures, and so forth. In this study, the inspection of cracks in laminated sheets under longitudinal magnetization will be discussed in detail.

Highlights

  • IntroductionMost of them are suitable to find out of the surface cracks on the laminated samples, pipe line tubes, and liquid storage tanks

  • There are varieties of nondestructive techniques for industrial use

  • The magnetic flux leakage measurement system consists of two main processes such as magnetization and magnetic measurement systems

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Most of them are suitable to find out of the surface cracks on the laminated samples, pipe line tubes, and liquid storage tanks. The basic factors that affect the method of nondestructive inspection chosen are product diameter, length, and wall thickness, fabrication methods, type and location of potential discontinuities, specification requirements, and extraneous variables such as a scratch, which might cause a rejectable indication, even though the product is acceptable. The most widely used nondestructive testing techniques for weld inspection of tubular products are ultrasonic, eddy current, magnetic flux leakage, radiographic, liquid penetrant, and magnetic particle. The first four are reliable for identifying internal flaws, whereas the last two are most reliable for detecting surface flaws. Each of these techniques has specific advantages and limitations [1]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call