Eddy Current Maths

Views:
 
Category: Entertainment
     
 

Presentation Description

Eddy current maths

Comments

Presentation Transcript

slide 1:

Electromagnetic Testing - Eddy Current Mathematics 2014-December My ASNT Level III Pre-Exam Preparatory Self Study Notes 外围学习中 Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 2:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 3:

Fion Zhang at Shanghai 2014/November http://meilishouxihu.blog.163.com/ Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Shanghai 上海

slide 4:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams

slide 5:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams

slide 6:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 7:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 8:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 9:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Greek letter

slide 10:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy Current Inspection Formula https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/ECFormula.htm

slide 11:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/ECFormula.htm

slide 12:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/ECFormula.htm

slide 13:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/ECFormula.htm

slide 14:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/ECFormula.htm

slide 15:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Units

slide 16:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Ohms Law: According to Ohms Law the voltage is the product of current and resistance. V I x R Where V Voltage in volts I Current in Amps and R Resistance in Ohms Inductance of a solenoid is given by: L μ o N 2 A/l https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductance

slide 17:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase Angle and Impedance Phase angle is expressed as follows: tan Φ X L /R Where: Φ Phase Angle in degrees X L Inductive Reactance in ohms and R Resistance in ohms. Impedance is defined as follows: Where Z Impedance in ohms R Resistance in ohms and X L Reactance in ohms.

slide 18:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Permeability and Relative Magnetic Permeability Magnetic permeability is the ratio between magnetic flux density and magnetizing force. μ B/H Where μ Magnetic Permeability in Henries per meter mu B Magnetic Flux Density in Tesla H Magnetizing Force in Amps/meter. Relative magnetic permeability is expressed as follows: μ r μ / μ o Where μ r Relative magnetic permeability mu and μ o Magnetic permeability of free space Henries per meter 1.257 10-6. μ r 1 for non- ferrous materials.

slide 19:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Conductivity and Resistivity Conductivity and resistivity is related as follows: σ 1/ ρ Where σ Conductivity sigma and ρ Resistivity rho. Conductivity can be quantified in Siemens per m S/m or in Aerospace NDT in lACS International Annealed Copper Standard. One Siemen is the inverse of an ohm. Another common unit used for conductivity measurement is Siemen per cm S/cm.

slide 20:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity Resistance can be defined as follows: R l /A σor R ρl/A Where: R the resistance of a uniform cross section conductor in ohms Ω l the length of the conductor in the same linear units as the conductivity or resistivity is quantified ACross Sectional area σ conductivity in S/m and ρ Resistivity in Ω m.

slide 21:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang In eddy current testing instead of describing conductivity in absolute terms an arbitrary unit has been widely adopted. Because the relative conductivities of metals and alloys vary over a wide range a conductivity benchmark has been widely used. In 1913 the International Electrochemical Commission established that a specified grade of high purity copper fully annealed - measuring 1 m long having a uniform section of 1 mm 2 and having a resistance of 17.241 m Ω at 20 °C 1.7241x10 -8 ohm-meter at 20 °C - would be arbitrarily considered 100 percent conductive. The symbol for conductivity is σ and the unit is Siemens per meter. Conductivity is also often expressed as a percentage of the International Annealed Copper Standard IACS.

slide 22:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 20000 0.0034 65 Gold 60000 30000 0.00382 0.00393 89.5 100 Copper: Hard drawn · Annealed 120000 0.00001 3.24 Constantin — 0.0033 16.3 Cobalt — — 55 Chromium — 0.0038 19 Cadmium 70000 0.002-0.007 28 Brass — — — — 45-50 30-45 Aluminum alloys: · Soft-annealed · Heat-treated 30000 0.0039 59 Aluminum 2S pure Tensile Strength lbs./sq. in. Temperature Coefficient of Resistance Relative Conductivity Metal Conductivity Resistivity http://www.wisetool.com/designation/cond.htm

slide 23:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 120000 0.006 12-16 Nickel 150000 0.0004 1.45 Nichrome 160000 0.002 4 Monel — 0.004 33.2 Molybdenum 0 0.00089 1.66 Mercury 150000 0.00001 3.7 Manganin 33000 0.004 — Magnesium 3000 0.0039 7 Lead — — — 0.005 — — 17.7 2-12 11.4 Iron: ·Pure ·Cast · Wrought Conductivity Resistivity

slide 24:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 10000 0.0037 28.2 Zinc 500000 0.0045 28.9 Tungsten 130000 — 5 Titanium 6A14V 50000 — 5 Titanium 4000 0.0042 13 Tin 42000-230000 0.004-0.005 3-15 Steel 42000 0.0038 106 Silver 55000 0.003 15 Platinum 25000 0.0018 36 Phosphor bronze 150000 0.00014 5.3 Nickel silver 18 Conductivity Resistivity

slide 25:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIGURE 13. Normalized impedance diagram for long coil encircling solid cylindrical non-ferromagnetic bar and for thin wall tube. Coil fill factor 1.0. Legend k √ ωμσ electromagnetic wave propagation constant for conducting material r radius of conducting cylinder m μ magnetic permeability of bar 4 πx10 –7 H·m -1 if bar is nonmagnetic σ electrical conductivity of bar S·m -1 ω angular frequency 2 πf where f frequency Hz √ ω L 0 G equivalent of √ ωμσ for simplified electrical circuits where G conductance S and L 0 inductance in air H

slide 26:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Legend k √ ωμσ electromagnetic wave propagation constant for conducting material r radius of conducting cylinder m μ magnetic permeability of bar 4 π x10 –7 H·m -1 if bar is nonmagnetic σ electrical conductivity of bar S·m -1 ω angular frequency 2 π f where f frequency Hz √ ω L 0 G equivalent of √ ωμσ for simplified electrical circuits where G conductance S and L 0 inductance in air H Keywords: δ √2/ωμσ 1/ √ωμσ 1/k 1/ π f μσ ½ For √ ω L 0 G √ ωμσ L 0 G μσ

slide 27:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The magnetic permeability μ is the ratio of flux density B to magnetic field intensity H: μ B ∙H -1 where B magnetic flux density tesla and H magnetizing force or magnetic field intensity A·m –1 . In free space magnetic permeability μ 0 4 π× 10 –7 H·m –1 .

slide 28:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic permeability of free space: μ 0 4 π× 10 –7 H·m –1

slide 29:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Permeability Magnetic Flux: Magnetic flux is the number of magnetic field lines passing through a surface placed in a magnetic field. We show magnetic flux with the Greek letter Ф. We find it with following formula Ф B ∙A ∙ cos ϴ Where Ф is the magnetic flux and unit of Ф is Weber Wb B is the magnetic field and unit of B is Tesla A is the area of the surface and unit of A is m 2 Following pictures show the two different angle situation of magnetic flux. ϴ http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 30:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang In a magnetic field lines are perpendicular to the surface thus since angle between normal of the surface and magnetic field lines 0 ° and cos 0 ° 1 equation of magnetic flux becomes Ф B ∙ A In b since the angle between the normal of the system and magnetic field lines is 90 ° and cos 90 ° 0 equation of magnetic flux become Ф B ∙ A ∙ cos 90 ° B ∙ A ∙ 0 0 a b http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 31:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Permeability - In previous units we have talked about heat conductivity and electric conductivity of matters. In this unit we learn magnetic permeability that is the quantity of ability to conduct magnetic flux. We show it with µ. Magnetic permeability is the distinguishing property of the matter every matter has specific µ. Picture given below shows the behavior of magnetic field lines in vacuum and in two different matters having different µ. http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 32:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic permeability of the vacuum is denoted by µ o and has value µ o 4 π.10 -7 Wb/Amps.m We find the permeability of the matter by following formula µ B / H Where H is the magnetic field strength and B is the flux density Relative permeability is the ratio of a specific medium permeability to the permeability of vacuum. µ r µ/µ o http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 33:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Diamagnetic matters: If the relative permeability f the matter is a little bit lower than 1 then we say these matters are diamagnetic. Paramagnetic matters: If the relative permeability of the matter is a little bit higher than 1 then we say these matters are paramagnetic. Ferromagnetic matters: If the relative permeability of the matter is higher than 1 with respect to paramagnetic matters then we say these matters are ferromagnetic matters. http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 34:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Permeability http://www.physicstutorials.org/home/magnetism/magnetic-flux-and-magnetic-permeability

slide 35:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Standard Depth

slide 36:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Standard Depth of Penetration Standard depth of penetration is given as follows: Where δ standard depth of penetration in m f frequency Hz μ Magnetic Permeability Henries per meter and σ conductivity in S/m. The influence of frequency and conductivity on standard depth of penetration is illustrated in Figure 1.

slide 37:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Figure 1. Influence of frequency and conductivity on standard depth of penetration.

slide 38:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Current Density Change with Depth The change in current density with depth is expressed as follows: J x J o e –x/ δ Where J x Current Density at distance x below the surface amps/m 2 J0 Current Density at the surface amps/m 2 e the base of the natural logarithm Eulers number 2.71828 x Distance below the surface and δ standard depth of penetration in meters.

slide 39:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Depth of Penetration and Probe Size Smith et al have introduced the idea of spatial frequency. Where D the effective diameter of the probe field in meters limiting the depth of penetration to D/4. The probe effective diameter is considered to be infinite in the usual equation.

slide 40:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Depth of Penetration Current Density http://www.suragus.com/en/company/eddy-current-testing-technology

slide 41:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Standard Depth Calculation Where: μ μ 0 x μ r

slide 42:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The applet below illustrates how eddy current density changes in a semi- infinite conductor. The applet can be used to calculate the standard depth of penetration. The equation for this calculation is: Where: δ Standard Depth of Penetration mm π 3.14 f Test Frequency Hz μ Magnetic Permeability H/mm σ Electrical Conductivity IACS

slide 43:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Defect Detection / Electrical conductivity measurement 1/e or 37 of surface density at target 1/e 3 or 5 of surface density at material interface Defect Detection Electrical conductivity measurement

slide 44:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The skin depth equation is strictly true only for infinitely thick material and planar magnetic fields. Using the standard depth δ calculated from the above equation makes it a material/test parameter rather than a true measure of penetration. FIG. 4.1. Eddy current distribution with depth in a thick plate and resultant phase lag. 1/e 1/e 2 1/e 3

slide 45:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Sensitivity to defects depends on eddy current density at defect location. Although eddy currents penetrate deeper than one standard depth δof penetration they decrease rapidly with depth. At two standard depths of penetration 2 δ eddy current density has decreased to 1/ e 2 or 13.5 of the surface density. At three depths 3 δ the eddy current density is down to only 1/ e 3 or 5 of the surface density. However one should keep in mind these values only apply to thick sample thickness t 5r and planar magnetic excitation fields. Planar field conditions require large diameter probes diameter 10t in plate testing or long coils length 5t in tube testing. Real test coils will rarely meet these requirements since they would possess low defect sensitivity. For thin plate or tube samples current density drops off less than calculated from Eq. 4.1. For solid cylinders the overriding factor is a decrease to zero at the centre resulting from geometry effects.

slide 46:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang One should also note that the magnetic flux is attenuated across the sample but not completely. Although the currents are restricted to flow within specimen boundaries the magnetic field extends into the air space beyond. This allows the inspection of multi-layer components separated by an air space. The sensitivity to a subsurface defect depends on the eddy current density at that depth it is therefore important to know the effective depth of penetration. The effective depth of penetration is arbitrarily defined as the depth at which eddy current density decreases to 5 of the surface density. For large probes and thick samples this depth is about three standard depths of penetration. Unfortunately for most components and practical probe sizes this depth will be less than 3 δ the eddy currents being attenuated more than predicted by the skin depth equation. Keywords: For large probes and thick samples this depth is about three standard depths of penetration. Unfortunately for most components and practical probe sizes this depth will be less than 3 δ.

slide 47:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Standard Depth of Penetration Versus Frequency Chart https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/DepthFreqChart/ECDepth.html

slide 48:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Field Size of Coil Typically the magnetic field β in the axial direction is relatively strong only for a distance of approximately one tenth of the coil diameter and drops rapidly to only approximately one tenth of the field strength near the coil at a distance of one coil diameter. DCoil diameter D β 0 0.1 β 0 0.1D

slide 49:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Flaw Detection Depth To penetrate deeply therefore large coil diameters are required. However as the coil diameter increases the sensitivity to small flaws whether surface or subsurface decreases. For this reason eddy current flaw detection is generally limited to depths most commonly of up to approximately 5 mm only occasionally up to 10 mm. For materials or components with greater cross-sections eddy current testing is usually used only for the detection of surface flaws and assessing material properties and radiography or ultrasonic testing is used to detect flaws which lie below the surface although eddy current testing can be used to detect flaws near the surface. However a very common application of eddy current testing is for the detection of flaws in thin material and for multilayer structures of flaws in a subsurface layer.

slide 50:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase Lag

slide 51:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase change with Depth Phase change with depth is expressed as follows: θº 57.3 x / δ Where θº Phase lag degrees 57.3 1 radian expressed in degrees x Distance below the surface and δ standard depth of penetration. The change in phase and current density with depth of penetration is depicted in Figure 2.

slide 52:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Figure 2. Phase and current density change with depth of penetration.

slide 53:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Frequency Frequency is expressed as follows: Where f frequency Hz x material thickness in meters μ Magnetic Permeability Henries per meter and σ conductivity in S/m. http://www.azom.com/article.aspxArticleID109534

slide 54:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams

slide 55:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase Lag Phase lag is a parameter of the eddy current signal that makes it possible to obtain information about the depth of a defect within a material. Phase lag is the shift in time between the eddy current response from a disruption on the surface and a disruption at some distance below the surface. The generation of eddy currents can be thought of as a time dependent process meaning that the eddy currents below the surface take a little longer to form than those at the surface. Disruptions in the eddy currents away from the surface will produce more phase lag than disruptions near the surface. Both the signal voltage and current will have this phase shift or lag with depth which is different from the phase angle discussed earlier. With the phase angle the current shifted with respect to the voltage. Keywords: Both the signal voltage and current will have this phase shift or lag with depth which is different from the phase angle discussed earlier. With the phase angle the current shifted with respect to the voltage.

slide 56:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase lag is an important parameter in eddy current testing because it makes it possible to estimate the depth of a defect and with proper reference specimens determine the rough size of a defect. The signal produced by a flaw depends on both the amplitude and phase of the eddy currents being disrupted. A small surface defect and large internal defect can have a similar effect on the magnitude of impedance in a test coil. However because of the increasing phase lag with depth there will be a characteristic difference in the test coil impedance vector. Phase lag can be calculated with the following equation. The phase lag angle calculated with this equation is useful for estimating the subsurface depth of a discontinuity that is concentrated at a specific depth. Discontinuities such as a crack that spans many depths must be divided into sections along its length and a weighted average determined for phase and amplitude at each position below the surface.

slide 57:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase Lag Where: β phase lag X distance below surface δ standard depth of penetration Eq. 4.2.

slide 58:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 4.1. Eddy current distribution with depth in a thick plate and resultant phase lag. 1/e 1/e 2 1/e 3 2 δ 1 δ 3 δ

slide 59:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang More on Phase lag Phase lag is a parameter of the eddy current signal that makes it possible to obtain information about the depth of a defect within a material. Phase lag is the shift in time between the eddy current response from a disruption on the surface and a disruption at some distance below the surface. Phase lag can be calculated using the equations to the right. The second equation simply converts radians to degrees by multiplying by 180/p or 57.3. The phase lag calculated with these equations should be about 1/2 the phase rotation seen between the liftoff signal and a defect signal on an impedance plane instrument. Therefore choosing a frequency that results in a standard depth of penetration of 1.25 times the expected depth of the defect will produce a phase lag of 45o and this should appear as a 90o separation between the liftoff and defect signals. https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/PhaseLag1/PhaseLag.htm

slide 60:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang https://www.nde-ed.org/GeneralResources/Formula/ECFormula/PhaseLag1/PhaseLag.htm The phase lag angle is useful for estimating the distance below the surface of discontinuities that concentrated at a specific depth. Discontinuities such as a crack must be divided into sections along its length and a weighted average determined for phase and amplitude at each position below the surface. For more information see the page explaining phase lag. Where: β phase lag X distance below surface in mm. δ standard depth of penetration in mm.

slide 61:

FIG. 5.32. Impedance diagram showing the signals from a shallow inside surface flaw and a shallow outside surface flaw at three different frequencies. The increase in the phase separation and the decrease in the amplitude of the outside surface flaw relative to that of the inside surface flaw with increasing frequency 2f 90 can be seen. Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase separation

slide 62:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase lag β x/ δ radian δ π f σμ -½ β x π f σμ -½

slide 63:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance

slide 64:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Inductive reactance XL in terms of frequency and inductance is given by: X L ω∙L 2 πf ∙L Similarly the Capacitance Reactance: X C 1/ ω∙C 1/ 2 πf ∙C Inductive reactance is directly proportional to frequency and its graph plotted against frequency ƒ is a straight line. Capacitive reactance is inversely proportional to frequency and its graph plotted against ƒ is a curve. These two quantities are shown together with R plotted against ƒ in Fig 9.2.1 It can be seen from this diagram that where XC and XL intersect they are equal and so a graph of XL − XC must be zero at this point on the frequency axis. http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/ac_theory/lcr_series_92.php

slide 65:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Reactance Voltage Current x Inductive Reactance E 1 I ∙X L http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/ac_theory/lcr_series_92.php

slide 66:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The Inductive Capacitive Reactance X L ωL 2 πfL X C 1/ ωC 1/ 2 πfC

slide 67:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The relationship between impedance and its individual components resistance and inductive reactance can be represented using a vector as shown below. The amplitude of the resistance component is shown by a vector along the x-axis and the amplitude of the inductive reactance is shown by a vector along the y-axis. The amplitude of the impedance is shown by a vector that stretches from zero to a point that represents both the resistance value in the x-direction and the inductive reactance in the y-direction. Eddy current instruments with impedance plane displays present information in this format.

slide 68:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 3.1.1 Induction and Reception Function There are two methods of sensing changes in the eddy current characteristics: a The impedance method b The send receive method Impedance method In the impedance method the driving coil is monitored. As the changes in coil voltage or a coil current are due to impedance changes in the coil it is possible to use the method for sensing any material parameters that result in impedance changes. The resultant impedance is a sum of the coil impedance in air plus the impedance generated by the eddy currents in the test material. The impedance method of eddy current testing consists of monitoring the voltage drop across a test coil. The impedance has resistive and inductive components. The impedance magnitude is calculated from the equation: |Z| R 2 + X L 2 ½ X c was assume nil Where: Z impedance R resistance X L inductive reactance

slide 69:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang and the impedance phase is calculated as: θ tan -1 X L / R Where: θ phase angle R resistance X L inductive reactance The voltage across the test coil is V IZ where I is the current through coil and Z is the impedance.

slide 70:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/impcom.html

slide 71:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/rlcser.html ω 2 πf

slide 72:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy Impedance plane responses

slide 73:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 74:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetism

slide 75:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The magnetic field B surrounds the current carrying conductor. For a long straight conductor carrying a unidirectional current the lines of magnetic flux are closed circular paths concentric with the axis of the conductor. Biot and Savart deduced from the experimental study of the field around a long straight conductor that the magnetic flux density B associated with the infinitely long current carrying conductor at a point P which is at a radial distance r as illustrated in FIG. below is B http://electrical4u.com/magnetic-flux-density-definition-calculation-formula/

slide 76:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase Shifts

slide 77:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Current Phase Shift – Inductance a vector sum of resistance reactance If more resistance than inductive reactance is present in the circuit the impedance line will move toward the resistance line and the phase shift will decrease. If more inductive reactance is present in the circuit the impedance line will shift toward the inductive reactance line and the phase shift will increase.

slide 78:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Capacitor circuit: Current lead voltage by 90 o Inductor circuit: Current lagging voltage by 90 o

slide 79:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Resonance Frequency

slide 80:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 3.2 Resonant Circuits Eddy current probes typically have a frequency or a range of frequencies that they are designed to operated. When the probe is operated outside of this range problems with the data can occur. When a probe is operated at too high of a frequency resonance can occurs in the circuit. In a parallel circuit with resistance R inductance XL and capacitance XC as the frequency increases XL decreases and XC increase. Resonance occurs when XL and XC are equal but opposite in strength. At the resonant frequency the total impedance of the circuit appears to come only from resistance since XL and XC cancel out. Every circuit containing capacitance and inductance has a resonant frequency that is inversely proportional to the square root of the product of the capacitance and inductance.

slide 81:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy current inspection At resonant frequency X c and X L cancelled out each other. Thus the phase angle is zero only the resistance component exist. The current is at it maximum.

slide 82:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Balance Bridge Circuit

slide 83:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Coil impedance is normally balanced using an AC bridge circuit. A common bridge circuit is shown in general form of FIG. 3.16. The arms of the bridge are being indicated as impedance of unspecified sorts. The detector is represented by a voltmeter. Balance is secured by adjustments of one or more of the bridge arms. Balance is indicated by zero response of the detector which means that points B and C are at the same potential have the same instantaneous voltage. Current will flow through the detector voltmeter if points B and C on the bridge arms are at different voltage levels. Current may flow in either direction depending on whether B or C is at higher potential. FIG. 3.16. Common bridge circuit.

slide 84:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang If the bridge is made of four impedance arms having inductive and resistive components the voltage from A-B-D must equal the voltage from A-C-D in both amplitude and phase for the bridge to be balanced. FIG. 3.16. Common bridge circuit.

slide 85:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang At balance: I 1 Z 1 I 2 Z 2 and I 1 Z 3 I 2 Z 4 From above equations we have: 3.4 The equation 3.4 states that ratio of impedance of pair of adjacent arms must equal the ratio of impedance of the other pair of adjacent arms for bridge balance. In a typical bridge circuit in eddy current instruments as shown in FIG. 3.17. the probe coils are placed in parallel to the variable resistors. The balancing is achieved by varying these resistors until null or balance condition is achieved. FIG. 3.17. Common Testing Arrangement

slide 86:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang At balance: I A Z 1 I B Z 3 I A Z 2 I B Z 4 I A Z 1 / I A Z 2 I B Z 3 / I B Z 4 From above equations we have: 3.4 The equation 3.4 states that ratio of impedance of pair of adjacent arms must equal the ratio of impedance of the other pair of adjacent arms for bridge balance. In a typical bridge circuit in eddy current instruments as shown in FIG. 3.17. the probe coils are placed in parallel to the variable resistors. The balancing is achieved by varying these resistors until null or balance condition is achieved. FIG. 3.17. Common Testing Arrangement I A I B I A

slide 87:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang At balance: V 1 V 1 I A Z 1 I B Z 3 I A Z 2 I B Z 4 I A Z/ I A Z 2 I B Z 3 / I B Z 4

slide 88:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams https://www.youtube.com/watchv2XuRGrGZ_9M

slide 89:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Subject on Balance Circuit- more reading

slide 90:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang A Maxwell bridge in long form a Maxwell-Wien bridge is a type of Wheatstone bridge used to measure an unknown inductance usually of low Q value in terms of calibrated resistance and capacitance. It is a real product bridge. It uses the principle that the positive phase angle of an inductive impedance can be compensated by the negative phase angle of a capacitive impedance when put in the opposite arm and the circuit is at resonance i.e. no potential difference across the detector and hence no current flowing through it. The unknown inductance then becomes known in terms of this capacitance. With reference to the picture in a typical application R1 and R4 are known fixed entities and R2 and C2 are known variable entities. R2 and C2 are adjusted until the bridge is balanced. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_bridge

slide 91:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang R3 and L3 can then be calculated based on the values of the other components: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_bridge C2 R2 R3 R1 L3 R4

slide 92:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_8/10.html

slide 93:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Circuits Wheatstone Bridge Part 1 ■ https://www.youtube.com/watchvKf5XkK0465A

slide 94:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Conductivity Measurement

slide 95:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Influence of temperature on the resistivity Higher temperature increases the thermal activity of the atoms in a metal lattice. The thermal activity causes the atoms to vibrate around their normal positions. The thermal vibration of the atoms increases the resistance to electron flow thereby lowering the conductivity of the metal. Lower temperature reduces thermal oscillation of the atoms resulting in increased electrical conductivity. The influence of temperature on the resistivity of a metal can be determined from the following equation. where R t resistivity of the metal at the test temperature R 0 resistivity of the metal at standard temperature α resistivity temperature coefficient T difference between the standard and test temperature °C. 4.3

slide 96:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang From Eq. 4.3 it can be seen that if the temperature is increased resistivity increases and conductivity decreases from their ambient temperature levels. Conversely if temperature is decreased the resistivity decreases and conductivity increases. To convert resistivity values such as those obtained from Eq. 4.3 to conductivity in terms of IACS the conversion formula is IACS 172.41/ ρ Where: IACS international annealed copper standard ρ resistivity unit ρ IACS 1.7241 10 -8 Ωm 4.4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity

slide 97:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 3.3.2 Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity In eddy current testing instead of describing conductivity in absolute terms an arbitrary unit has been widely adopted. Because the relative conductivities of metals and alloys vary over a wide range a conductivity benchmark has been widely used. In 1913 the International Electrochemical Commission established that a specified grade of high purity copper fully annealed - measuring 1 m long having a uniform section of 1 mm 2 and having a resistance of 1.7241x10-8 ohm-meter at 20 °C 100 IACS 1.7241x10 -8 ohm-meter at 20 °C - would be arbitrarily considered 100 percent conductive. The symbol for conductivity is σ and the unit is Siemens per meter. Conductivity is also often expressed as a percentage of the International Annealed Copper Standard IACS. Note: 100 IACS 1.7241x10 -8 ohm-meter at 20 °C

slide 98:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Example: The eddy current conductivity should be corrected by using Equations 4.3 and 4.4. In aluminium alloy for example a change of approximately 12 IACS for a 55°C change in temperature using handbook resistivity values of 2.828 micro-ohm centimeters and a temperature coefficient of 0.0039 at 20 °C. If the conductivity of commercially pure aluminium is 62 IACS at 20 °C then one would expect a conductivity of 55 IACS at 48 °C and a conductivity of 69 IACS at –10 °C.

slide 99:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang http://www.centurionndt.com/Technical20Papers/condarticle.htm

slide 100:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang http://www.centurionndt.com/Technical20Papers/condarticle.htm

slide 101:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang http://www.centurionndt.com/Technical20Papers/condarticle.htm

slide 102:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang http://www.centurionndt.com/Technical20Papers/condarticle.htm

slide 103:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Conductivity and its measurement The SI unit of conductivity is the Siemens/metre S/m but because it is a very small unit its multiple the megaSiemens/metre MS/m is more commonly used. Eddy current conductivity meters usually give readouts in the practical unit of conductivity IACS International Annealed Copper Standard which give the conductivity relative to annealed commercially pure copper. To convert IACS to MS/m multiply by 0.58 and to convert MS/m to IACS multiply by 1.724. For instance the conductivity of Type 304 stainless steel is 2.5 IACS or 1.45MS/m. Resistivity is the inverse of conductivity and some publications on eddy current testing refer to resistivity values rather than conductivity values. However conductivity in IACS is universally used in the aluminium and aerospace industries.

slide 104:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Fill Factors

slide 105:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Centering fill factor η Eta In an encircling coil or an internal coil fill factor “ η Eta” is a measure of how well the conductor test specimen fits the coil. It is necessary to maintain a constant relationship between the diameter of the coil and the diameter of the conductor. Again small changes in the diameter of the conductor can cause changes in the impedance of the coil. This can be useful in detecting changes in the diameter of the conductor but it can also mask other indications. For an external coil: Fill Factor η D 1 /D 2 2 4.5 For an internal coil: Fill Factor η D 2 /D 1 2 4.6 where η fill factor D 1 part diameter D 2 coil diameter

slide 106:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Thus the fill factor must be less than 1 since if η 1 the coil is exactly the same size as the material. However the closer the fill factor is to 1 the more precise the test. The fill factor can also be expressed as a . For maximum sensitivity the fill factor should be as high as possible compatible with easy movement of the probe in the tube. Note that the fill factor can never exceed 1 100.

slide 107:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Frequency Selections

slide 108:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Probe and frequency selection The essential requirements for the detection of subsurface flaws are sufficient penetration for sensitivity to the subsurface flaws sought and sufficient phase separation of the signals for the location or depth of the flaws to be identified. As standard depth of penetration increases the phase difference between discontinuities of different depth decreases. Therefore making interpretation of location or depth of the flaws difficult. Example: If the frequency is set to obtain a standard depth of penetration of 2 mm the separation between discontinuities at 1 mm and 2 mm would be 57 °. If the frequency is set to obtain a standard depth of penetration of 4 mm the separation between discontinuities at 1 mm and 2 mm would be 28.5 °. Keywords: As standard depth of penetration increases the phase difference between discontinuities of different depth decreases.

slide 109:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang An acceptable compromise which gives both adequate sensitivity to subsurface flaws and adequate phase separation between near side and far side flaw signals is to use a frequency for which the thickness t 0.8 δ. At this frequency the signal from a shallow far side flaw is close to 90 ° clockwise from the signal from a shallow near side flaw so this frequency is termed f 90 . By substituting t 0.8 δ into the standard depth of penetration formula and changing Hz to kHz the following formula is obtained: f 90 280/ t 2 σ 5.1 Where: f 90 the operating frequency kHz t the thickness or depth of material to be tested mm and σ the conductivity of the test material IACS.

slide 110:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.15. Eddy current signals from a thin plate with a shallow near side flaw a shallow far side flaw and a through hole at three different frequencies. 1. At 25 kHz a the sensitivity to far side flaws is high but the phase difference between near side and far side signals is relatively small. 2. At 200 kHz c the phase separation between near side and jar side signals is large. but the sensitivity to far side flaws is poor. 3. For this test part a test frequency of100 kHz b shows both good sensitivity to far side flaws and good phase separation between near side and far side signals.

slide 111:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang To obtain adequate depth of penetration not only must the frequency be lower than for the detection of surface flaws but also the coil diameter must be larger. On flat surfaces a spot probe either absolute or reflection should be used in order to obtain stable signals see FIG. 5.16. On curved surfaces a spot probe with a concave face or a pencil probe should be used. Spring loaded spot probes can be used to minimize lift-off and shielded spot probes are available for scanning close to edges fasteners and sharp changes in configuration.

slide 112:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Probes Frequency

slide 113:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Typically for aluminium alloys frequencies in the range approximately 200 kHz to 500 kHz are appropriate with approximately 200 kHz being preferred. For low conductivity materials like stainless steel nickel alloys and titanium alloys the penetration would be excessive at these frequencies and higher frequencies are required. Typically 2 MHz to 6 MHz should be used. Al: .2MHz .5MHz SS Ni Ti Alloys: 2MHz 6MHz Ferromagnetic Mtls:

slide 114:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phasol Diagrams

slide 115:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy Impedance plane responses

slide 116:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 117:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIGURE 11. Measured conductivity locus with conductivity expressed in siemens per meter percentages of International Annealed Copper Standard

slide 118:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.19. Impedance diagrams and the conductivity curve at three different frequencies showing that as frequency increases the operating point moves down the conductivity curve. It can also be seen that the angle θ between the conductivity and lift-off curve is quite small for operating points near the top of the conductivity curve but greater in the middle and lower parts of the curve. The increased sensitivity to variations in conductivity towards the centre of the conductivity curve can also be seen. 20KHz 100KHz 1000KHz

slide 119:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 120:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 121:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 122:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.24. Impedance diagram showing the conductivity curve and the locus of the operating points for thin red brass conductivity approximately 40 IACS at 120 kHz the thickness curve. The thickness curve meets the conductivity curve when the thickness equals the Effective Depth of Penetration EDP.

slide 123:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.25. Impedance diagram showing the conductivity curve and the thickness curve for brass at a frequency of 120 kHz the f 90 frequency for a thickness of 0.165 mm. The operating point for this thickness is shown and lift- off curves for this and various other thicknesses are also shown.

slide 124:

FIG. 5.32. Impedance diagram showing the signals from a shallow inside surface flaw and a shallow outside surface flaw at three different frequencies. The increase in the phase separation and the decrease in the amplitude of the outside surface flaw relative to that of the inside surface flaw with increasing frequency 2f 90 can be seen. Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase separation

slide 125:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phase lag β x/ δ radian δ πfσμ -½

slide 126:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.35. Impedance diagram showing flaw signals and a signal from an inside surface ferromagnetic condition at three different frequencies. The insert shows the signals at 19 ° rotated to their approximate orientation on an eddy current instrument display.

slide 127:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIG. 5.36 shows the signal from a ferromagnetic condition at the outside surface. It could be confused with a signal from a dent but the two can readily be distinguished if required by retesting at a different test frequency. The signal from a ferromagnetic condition at the outside surface will show phase rotation with respect to the signal from an inside surface flaw as stated above whereas a dent signal will remain approximately 180 ° from the inside surface flaw signal. FIG. 5.36. The signals from a typical absolute probe from flaws. an outside surface ferromagnetic condition a dent a ferromagnetic baffle plate and a non- ferromagnetic support tested at f 90 .

slide 128:

Impedance Phasol Diagrams 1. conductivity measurement 2. permeability measurement 3. metal thickness measurement 4. coating thickness measurements 5. flaw detection

slide 129:

Conductivity

slide 130:

constant frequency 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance Stainless Steel 304 Copper Aluminum 7075-T6 Titanium 6Al-4V Magnesium A280 Lead Copper 70 Nickel 30 Inconel Nickel Conductivity versus Probe Impedance

slide 131:

IACS International Annealed Copper Standard σ IACS 5.8 10 7 Ω -1 m -1 at 20 °C ρ IACS 1.7241 10 -8 Ωm 20 30 40 50 60 Conductivity IACS T3 T4 T6 T0 2014 T4 T6 T0 6061 T6 T73 T76 T0 7075 2024 T3 T4 T6 T72 T8 T0 Various Aluminum Alloys Conductivity versus Alloying Temper

slide 132:

• high accuracy  0.1 • controlled penetration depth specimen eddy currents probe coil magnetic field 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.1 0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 lift-off curves conductivity curve frequency Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance       0  s  1 2 3 4 Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance Apparent Eddy Current Conductivity

slide 133:

inductive low frequency capacitive high frequency “Horizontal” Component “Vertical” Component lift-off . conductivity σ 2 σ 1 σ ℓ s ℓ 0 “Horizontal” Component “Vertical” Component . conductivity lift-off σ 2 σ 1 σ ℓ s ℓ 0 Lift-Off Curvature

slide 134:

-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz Relative ΔAECC . -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz Relative ΔAECC . 63.5 μm 50.8 μm 38.1 μm 25.4 μm 19.1 μm 12.7 μm 6.4 μm 0.0 μm -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz AECL μm . -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz AECL μm . . 63.5 μm 50.8 μm 38.1 μm 25.4 μm 19.1 μm 12.7 μm 6.4 μm 0.0 μm 4 mm diameter 8 mm diameter 1.5 IACS 1.5 IACS Inductive Lift Off Effects

slide 135:

-0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz AECC Change . 12A Nortec 8A Nortec 4A Nortec 12A Agilent 8A Agilent 4A Agilent 12A UniWest 8A UniWest 4A UniWest 12A Stanford 8A Stanford 4A Stanford Nortec 2000S Agilent 4294A Stanford Research SR844 and UniWest US-450 conductivity spectra comparison on IN718 specimens of different peening intensities. Instrument Calibration

slide 136:

Permeability Phasol Diagram

slide 137:

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.1 0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 lift-off frequency conductivity Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance permeability Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance 0 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 2 3 1 µ r 4 permeability moderately high susceptibility low susceptibility paramagnetic materials with small ferromagnetic phase content increasing magnetic susceptibility decreases the apparent eddy current conductivity AECC frequency conductivity Magnetic Susceptibility

slide 138:

10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 0 10 1 010 20 30 40 50 60 Cold Work Magnetic Susceptibility SS304L IN276 IN718 SS305 SS304 SS302 IN625 cold work plastic deformation at room temperature causes martensitic ferromagnetic phase transformation in austenitic stainless steels Magnetic Susceptibility versus Cold Works

slide 139:

Metal Thickness Phasol Diagram

slide 140:

thickness loss due to corrosion erosion etc. probe coil scanning 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 thick plate Normalized Resistance Normalized Reactance thin plate lift-off thinning -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 01 2 3 Depth mm Re F f 0.05 MHz f 0.2 MHz f 1 MHz aluminum σ 46 IACS // x ix Fx e e     Thickness versus Normalized Impedance

slide 141:

1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 0.1 1 10 Frequency MHz Conductivity IACS 1.0 mm 1.5 mm 2.0 mm 2.5 mm 3.0 mm 3.5 mm 4.0 mm 5.0 mm 6.0 mm thickness Vic-3D simulation Inconel plates σ 1.33 IACS a o 4.5 mm a i 2.25 mm h 2.25 mm Thickness Correction

slide 142:

Coating Thickness Phasol Diagrams

slide 143:

non-conducting coating probe coil a o t d ℓ conducting substrate a o t d δ AECL ℓ + t -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz AECL μm -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0.1 1 10 100 Frequency MHz AECL μm 63.5 μm 50.8 μm 38.1 μm 25.4 μm 19.1 μm 12.7 μm 6.4 μm 0 μm a o 4 mm simulated lift-off: a o 4 mm experimental Non-Conductive Coating

slide 144:

conducting coating probe coil a o t d ℓ conducting substrate µ s σ s approximate: large transducer weak perturbation equivalent depth:  e 1 AECC 2 s s f f           2 1 AECC 4 s s z z        s e 2   analytical: Fourier decomposition Dodd and Deeds numerical: finite element finite difference volume integral etc. Vic-3D Opera 3D etc. z J e z δ e Conductive Coating

slide 145:

AECC Change -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.001 0.1 10 1000 Frequency MHz AECC Change -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.001 0.1 10 1000 Frequency MHz Depth mm Conductivity Change -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 input profile inverted from AECC uniform Depth mm Conductivity Change -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 input profile inverted from AECC Gaussian 0.254-mm-thick surface layer of 1 excess conductivity Simplistic Inversion of AECC Spectra

slide 146:

Flaw Detection Phasol Diagrams

slide 147:

Normalized Resistance 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 conductivity frequency crack depth flawless material ω 1 lift-off Normalized Reactance ω 2 apparent eddy current conductivity AECC decreases apparent eddy current lift-off AECL increases Impedance Diagram

slide 148:

probe coil crack 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 01 2 3 4 5 Flaw Length mm Normalized AECC semi-circular crack -10 threshold detection threshold a o 1 mm a i 0.75 mm h 1.5 mm austenitic stainless steel σ 2.5 IACS μ r 1 Vic-3D simulation f 5 MHz δ  0.19 mm Crack Contrast Resolution

slide 149:

Al2024 0.025-mil crack Ti-6Al-4V 0.026-mil-crack 0.5”  0.5” 2 MHz 0.060”-diameter coil probe coil crack Eddy Current of Small Fatigue Crack

slide 150:

  JE 11 1 22 2 333 00 00 00 JE JE JE                        generally anisotropic hexagonal transversely isotropic 11 1 22 2 323 00 00 00 JE JE JE              cubic isotropic 11 1 21 2 313 00 00 00 JE JE JE              σ 1 conductivity normal to the basal plane σ 2 conductivity in the basal plane θ polar angle from the normal of the basal plane σ m minimum conductivity in the surface plane σ M maximum conductivity in the surface plane σ a average conductivity in the surface plane 22 a1 2 絒 sin 1 cos       22 n1 2 cos sin      M2  12   22 m1 2 sin cos     x 1 x 3 x 2 basal plane θ surface plane σ n σ m σ M Crystallographic Texture

slide 151:

1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 Azimuthal Angle deg Conductivity IACS highly textured Ti-6Al-4V plate equiaxed GTD-111 1.30 1.32 1.34 1.36 1.38 1.40 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 Azimuthal Angle deg Conductivity IACS 500 kHz racetrack coil Electric “Birefringence” Due to Texture

slide 152:

as-received billet material solution treated and annealed heat-treated coarse heat-treated very coarse heat-treated large colonies equiaxed beta annealed 1”  1” 2 MHz 0.060”-diameter coil Grain Noise in Ti-6Al-4V

slide 153:

5 MHz eddy current 40 MHz acoustic 1”  1” coarse grained Ti-6Al-4V sample Eddy Current versus Acoustic Microscopy

slide 154:

AECC Images of Waspaloy and IN100 Specimens homogeneous IN100 2.2”  1.1” 6 MHz conductivity range 1.33-1.34 IACS ±0.4 relative variation inhomogeneous Waspaloy 4.2”  2.1” 6 MHz conductivity range 1.38-1.47 IACS ±3 relative variation Inhomogeneity

slide 155:

1.30 1.32 1.34 1.36 1.38 1.40 1.42 1.44 1.46 1.48 1.50 0.1 1 10 Frequency MHz AECC IACS Spot 1 1.441 IACS Spot 2 1.428 IACS Spot 3 1.395 IACS Spot 4 1.382 IACS as-forged Waspaloy no average frequency dependence Conductive Material Noise

slide 156:

1”  1” stainless steel 304 f 0.1 MHz ΔAECC  6.4 f 5 MHz ΔAECC  0.8 intact f 0.1 MHz ΔAECC  8.6 f 5 MHz ΔAECC  1.2 0.51 ×0.26 ×0.03 mm 3 edm notch Magnetic Susceptibility Material Noise

slide 157:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Phase Responses

slide 158:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy current inspection

slide 159:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Phasor Diagram Al Steel

slide 160:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang If the eddy current circuit is balanced in air and then placed on a piece of aluminum the resistance component will increase eddy currents are being generated in the aluminum and this takes energy away from the coil which shows up as resistance and the inductive reactance of the coil decreases the magnetic field created by the eddy currents opposes the coils magnetic field and the net effect is a weaker magnetic field to produce inductance. If a crack is present in the material fewer eddy currents will be able to form and the resistance will go back down and the inductive reactance will go back up. Changes in conductivity will cause the eddy current signal to change in a different way.

slide 161:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Plane Respond - Non magnetic materials

slide 162:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy current inspection

slide 163:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang  The resistance component R will increase eddy currents are being generated in the aluminum and this takes energy away from the coil which shows up as resistance  The inductive reactance X L of the coil decreases the magnetic field created by the eddy currents opposes the coils magnetic field and the net effect is a weaker magnetic field to produce inductance.

slide 164:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang If a crack is present in the material fewer eddy currents will be able to form and the resistance will go back down and the inductive reactance will go back up.

slide 165:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Changes in conductivity will cause the eddy current signal to change in a different way.

slide 166:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Discussion Topic: Discuss on “Changes in conductivity will cause the eddy current signal to change in a different way.” Answer: Increase in conductivity will increase the intensity of eddy current on the surface of material the strong eddy current generated will reduce the current of the coil show-up as ↑ R ↓X L

slide 167:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Magnetic Materials

slide 168:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang When a probe is placed on a magnetic material such as steel something different happens. Just like with aluminum conductive but not magnetic eddy currents form taking energy away from the coil which shows up as an increase in the coils resistance. And just like with the aluminum the eddy currents generate their own magnetic field that opposes the coils magnetic field. However you will note for the diagram that the reactance increases. This is because the magnetic permeability of the steel concentrates the coils magnetic field. This increase in the magnetic field strength completely overshadows the magnetic field of the eddy currents. The presence of a crack or a change in the conductivity will produce a change in the eddy current signal similar to that seen with aluminum.

slide 169:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang  The eddy currents form taking energy away from the coil which shows up as an increase in the coils resistance.  The reactance increases. This is because the magnetic permeability of the steel concentrates the coils magnetic field.  This increase in the magnetic field strength completely overshadows the effects magnetic field of the eddy currents on decreasing the inductive reactance.

slide 170:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang This increase in the magnetic field strength completely overshadows the magnetic field of the eddy currents. The inductive reactance XL of the coil decreases the magnetic field created by the eddy currents opposes the coils magnetic field and the net effect is a weaker magnetic field to produce inductance.

slide 171:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang The presence of a crack or a change in the conductivity will produce a change in the eddy current signal similar to that seen with aluminum.  If a crack is present in the material fewer eddy currents will be able to form and the resistance will go back down and the inductive reactance will go back up  Changes in conductivity will cause the eddy current signal to change in a different way.

slide 172:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Eddy current inspection The increase in Resistance R: this was due to the decrease in current due to generation of eddy current shown-up as increase in resistance R. The increase of Inductive Reactance: this is due to concentration of magnetic field by the effects magnetic permeability of steel

slide 173:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Exercise: Explains the impedance plane responds for Aluminum and Steel Al: 1. Eddy current reduces coil current show- up as ↑R ↓X L 2. Crack reduce eddy current reduce the effects on R X L 3. Increase in conductivity increase eddy current increasing the effects on R X L Steel: 1. Eddy current reduces coil current show- up as ↑R ↓X L . However net ↑X L increase as magnetic permeability of the steel concentrates the coils magnetic field 1 2 3 1

slide 174:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang In the applet below liftoff curves can be generated for several nonconductive materials with various electrical conductivities. With the probe held away from the metal surface zero and clear the graph. Then slowly move the probe to the surface of the material. Lift the probe back up select a different material and touch it back to the sample surface.

slide 175:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Impedance Plane Respond –Fe Cu Al https://www.nde-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/EddyCurrents/Instrumentation/Popups/applet3/applet3.htm Fe Al Cu Question: Why impedance plane respond of steel Fe in the same quadrant as the non-magnetic Cu and Al

slide 176:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Experiment Generate a family of liftoff curves for the different materials available in the applet using a frequency of 10kHz. Note the relative position of each of the curves. Repeat at 500kHz and 2MHz. Note: it might be helpful to capture an image of the complete set of curves for each frequency for comparison. 1 Which frequency would be best if you needed to distinguish between two high conductivity materials 2 Which frequency would be best if you needed to distinguish between two low conductivity materials The impedance calculations in the above applet are based on codes by Jack Blitz from "Electrical and Magnetic Methods of Nondestructive Testing" 2nd ed. Chapman and Hill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_reactance

slide 177:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Hurray

slide 178:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang With phase analysis eddy current instruments an operator can produce impedance plane loci plots or curves automatically on a flying dot oscilloscope or integral cathode ray tube. Such impedance plane plots can be presented for the following material conditions as shown in Fig. 8: 1 liftoff and edge effects 2 cracks 3 material separation and spacing 4 permeability 5 specimen thinning 6 conductivity and 7 plating thickness. Evaluation of these plots shows that ferromagnetic material conditions produce higher values of inductive reactance than values obtained from nonmagnetic material conditions. Hence the magnetic domain is at the upper quadrant of the impedance plane whereas nonmagnetic materials are in the lower quadrant. The separation of the two domains occurs at the inductive reactance values obtained with the coil removed from the conductor sample this is proportional to the value of the coil’s self-inductance L.

slide 179:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang FIGURE 8. Impedance changes in relation to one another on impedance plane. Legend C a crack in aluminum C s crack in steel P a plating aluminum on copper P c plating copper on aluminum P n plating nonmagnetic S spacing between Al layers T thinning in aluminum μ permeability σ m conductivity for magnetic materials σ n conductivity for nonmagnetic materials

slide 180:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Electric Magnetic Factors

slide 181:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang A. Length of the test sample B. Thickness of the test sample C. Cross sectional area of the test sample A. Heat treatment give the metal B. Cold working performed on the metal C. Aging process used on the metal D. Hardness Crack discontinuities Magnetic Permeability Dimensions Conductivity

slide 182:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Characteristic Frequency fg

slide 183:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 31. The abscissa values on the impedance plane shown in Figure 2 are given in terms of: A. Absolute conductivity B. Normalized resistance C. Absolute inductance D. Normalized inductance

slide 184:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 32. In Figure 2 an impedance diagram for solid nonmagnetic rod the fg or characteristic frequency is calculated by the formula: A. fg σμ/d² B. fg δμ/d C. fg 5060/ σμd² D. fg R/L 33. In Figure 2 a change in the f/fg ratio will result in: A. A change in only the magnitude of the voltage across the coil B. A change in only the phase of the voltage across the coil C. A change in both the phase and magnitude of the voltage across the coil D. No change in the phase or magnitude of the voltage across the coil

slide 185:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 34. In Figure 3 the solid curves are plots for different values of: A. Heat treatment B. Conductivity C. Fill factor D. Permeability

slide 186:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 3.1.2 Limiting Frequency f g of Encircling Coils Encircling coils are used more frequently than surface-mounted coils. With encircling coils the degree of filling has a similar effect to clearance with surface-mounted coils. The degree of filling is the ratio of the test material cross-sectional area to the coil cross-sectional area. Figure 3.7 shows the effect of degree of filling on the impedance plane of the encircling coil. For tubes the limiting frequency point where ohmic losses of the material are the greatest can be calculated precisely from Eq. 3.2: Introduction to Nondestructive Testing: A Training Guide Second Edition by Paul E. Mix

slide 187:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang f g 5056/ σ∙ d i ∙ w∙μ r 3.2 Where: f g limiting frequency σ conductivity d i inner diameter w wall thickness μ r rel relative permeability For Solid Rod: fg 5060/ σμ r d 2 3.2 Where: d solid rod diameter Introduction to Nondestructive Testing: A Training Guide Second Edition by Paul E. Mix

slide 188:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Figure 4

slide 189:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Figure 5

slide 190:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang 51. Which of the following is not a factor that affects the inductance of an eddy current test coil A. Diameter of coils B. Test frequency L μ o N 2 A/l C. Overall shape of the coils D. Distance from other coils 52. The formula used to calculate the impedance of an eddy current test coil is: D 53. An out of phase condition between current and voltage: A. Can exist only in the primary winding of an eddy current coil B. Can exist only in the secondary winding of an eddy current coil C. Can exist in both the primary and secondary windings of an eddy current coil D. Exists only in the test specimen

slide 191:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Inductance The increasing magnetic flux due to the changing current creates an opposing emf in the circuit. The inductor resists the change in the current in the circuit. If the current changes quickly the inductor responds harshly. If the current changes slowly the inductor barely notices. Once the current stops changing the inductor seems to disappear. http://sdsu-physics.org/physics180/physics196/Topics/inductance.html

slide 192:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Discussion Topic: What is Pulse Eddy Current

slide 193:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang

slide 194:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Good Luck

slide 195:

Charlie Chong/ Fion Zhang Good Luck

authorStream Live Help