Extracting the region of interest from MFL signals

: In this paper, we study the magnetic flux leakage (MFL) signals for detection of defects in ferromagnetic materials. MFL signals consist of a background that is not constant and is combined with noise. Since there are slight variations because of noise, any large distortion shows a defect. Here the estimation of the background and then the determination of a threshold to distinguish defects from noise have been used for locating defects. In this method, precise evaluation of these two parameters has a vital role on the defect detection. The concept of histograms has been employed for eliminating the effect of defects in computing background signal. Results show that this algorithm is fast enough and yields detection of more defects that have lower amplitude. In the next step, an appropriate value for the threshold is determined by considering a trade-off between defect detection rate and noise separation rate.

PDF

___

[1] Cheng SH, Wu X, Kang Y. Local area magnetization and inspection method for aerial pipelines. NDT&E Int 2005; 38: 448452.
[2] Kosmas K, Sargentis CH, Tsamakis D, Hristoforou E. Non-destructive evaluation of magnetic metallic materials using Hall sensors. J Mater Process Tech 2005; 161: 359362.
[3] Rainer P, Erhard A, Montag HJ, Thomas HM, W¨ustenberg H. NDT techniques for railroad wheel and gauge corner inspection. NDT&E Int 2004; 37: 8994.
[4] Ding J, Kang Y, Wu X. Tubing thread inspection by magnetic flux leakage. NDT&E Int 2006; 39: 5356.
[5] Afzal M, Udpa S. Advanced signal processing of magnetic flux leakage data obtained from seamless gas pipeline. NDT&E Int 2002; 35: 449457.
[6] Han W, Que P. A modified wavelet transform domain adaptive FIR filtering algorithm for removing the SPN in the MFL data. Measurement 2006; 39: 621627.
[7] Bainton KF. Characterizing defects by determining magnetic leakage field. NDT&E Int 1977; 10: 253257.
[8] Al-Naemi FI, Hall JP, Moses AJ. FEM modeling techniques of magnetic flux leakage-type NDT for ferromagnetic plate inspections. J Magn Magn Mater 2006; 304: 790793.
[9] Katoh M, Masumoto N, Nishio K, Yamaguchi T. Modeling of the yoke-magnetization in MFL-testing by finite elements. NDT&E Int 2003; 36: 479486.
[10] Zuoying H, Peiwen Q, Liang C. 3D FEM analysis in magnetic flux leakage method. NDT&E Int 2006, 39: 6166.
[11] Li Y, Wilson J, Tian GY. Experiment and simulation study of 3D magnetic field sensing for magnetic flux leakage defect characterization. NDT&E Int 2007, 40: 179184.
[12] Amineh RK, Nikolova NK, Reilly JP, Hare JR. Characterization of surface-breaking cracks using one tangential component of magnetic leakage field measurements. IEEE T Magn 2008, 44: 516524.
[13] Amineh RK, Koziel S, Nikolova NK, Bandler JW, Reilly JP. A space mapping methodology for defect characterization from magnetic flux leakage measurements. IEEE T Magn 2008, 44: 20582065.
[14] Babbar V, Bryne J, Clapham L. Mechanical damage detection using magnetic flux leakage tools: modeling the effect of dent geometry and stresses. NDT&E Int 2005, 38: 471477.
[15] Wilson J, Tian GY, Barrans S. Residual magnetic field sensing for stress measurement. Sensor Actuat A-Phys 2007, 135: 381387.
[16] Carvalho AA, Rebello JMA, Sagrilo LVS, Camerini CS, Miranda IVJ. MFL signals and artificial neural networks applied to detection and classification of pipe weld defects. NDT&E Int 2006, 39: 661667.