Sensing and Imaging

, 20:27 | Cite as

Simulation Research of Impact of Number of Coils in EMT Sensors on Reconstructed Images Quality

  • Xianglong Liu
  • Ze LiuEmail author
  • Yuanli Yue
Original Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Recent Developments in Sensing and Imaging


Electromagnetic tomography (EMT) has been developed for visualizing the conductivity distribution of materials with multi-coil electromagnetic sensors. It is crucial to design an optimized EMT sensor for the improvement of reconstructed images quality. The selection of the number of coils is discussed in this paper due to its great importance to system performance and system complexity. It is commonly believed that more coils in EMT sensor would obtain better performance of reconstructed images. In order to study the impact of number of coils in EMT sensors on quality of reconstructed images, five kinds of sensors with different number of coils including 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20, are involved to conduct numerical simulations. EMT forward problem can be solved through implementing finite element method, then measurements and sensitivity matrix are obtained, which can be used to solve EMT inverse problem with proper image reconstruction algorithms. Five typical conductivity distributions are used to verify the performance of EMT sensors with different number of coils. The sensitivity matrices of different EMT sensors are analyzed to further explain the essential reason of these numerical simulation results using singular value decomposition. It can be concluded that EMT sensor with 16 coils produces good-enough image reconstruction results for most of the typical conductivity distributions. Limited improvement can be obtained in the quality of reconstructed images when the number of coils is more than 16.


Electromagnetic tomography Image reconstruction Conjugate gradient Landweber iteration Inverse problem Singular value decomposition (SVD) 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61771041.


  1. 1.
    Peyton, A. J., et al. (1996). An overview of electromagnetic inductance tomography: Description of three different systems. Measurement Science and Technology, 7, 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ma, L., & Soleimani, M. (2017). Magnetic induction tomography methods and applications: A review. Measurement Science and Technology, 28, 1–12.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu, Z., Yang, G. Y., He, N., & Tan, X. Y. (2012). Landweber iterative algorithm based on regularization in electromagnetic tomography for multiphase flow measurement. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 27, 53–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Terzija, N., Yin, W., Gerbeth, G., et al. (2011). Use of electromagnetic induction tomography for monitoring liquid metal/gas flow regimes on a model of an industrial steel caster. Measurement Science and Technology, 22, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Binns, R., Alyons, A. R., & Peyton, A. J. (2001). Imaging molten steel flow profiles. Measurement Science and Technology, 12, 1132–1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ma, X. D., Peyton, A. J., Binns, R., & Higson, S. R. (2005). Electromagnetic techniques for imaging the cross-section distribution of molten steel flow in the continuous casting nozzle. IEEE Sensors Journal, 5, 224–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu, Z., Li, W., Xue, F., Xiafang, J., Bu, B., & Yi, Z. (2015). Electromagnetic tomography rail defect inspection. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 51, 1–7.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Merwa, R., Hollaus, K., Oszkar, B., & Scharfetter, H. (2004). Detection of brain oedema using magnetic induction tomography: A feasibility study of the likely sensitivity and detectability. Physiological Measurement, 25, 347–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ma, X., Peyton, A. J., Higson, S. R., & Drake, P. (2008). Development of multiple frequency electromagnetic induction systems for steel flow visualization. Measurement Science and Technology, 19, 094008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yin, W., & Peyton, A. J. (2006). A planar EMT system for the detection of faults on thin metallic plates. Measurement Science and Technology, 17, 2130–2135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ma, L., & Soleimani, M. (2014). Hidden defect identification in carbon fibre reinforced polymer plates using magnetic induction tomography. Measurement Science and Technology, 25, 055404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peng, L. H., Ye, J. M., Lu, G., & Yang, W. Q. (2012). Evaluation of effect of number of electrodes in ECT sensors on image quality. IEEE Sensors Journal, 12, 1554–1565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ye, J. M., Wang, H. G., & Yang, W. Q. (2013). Evaluation of effect of number of electrodes in ERT sensors on image quality. In 2013 IEEE international conference on imaging systems and techniques (IST) (pp. 19–24).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang, W. Q., Spink, D. M., York, T. A., & Mccann, H. (1999). An image-reconstruction algorithm based on Landweber’s iteration method for electrical-capacitance tomography. Measurement Science and Technology, 10, 1065–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang, W. Q., & Peng, L. H. (2003). Image reconstruction algorithms for electrical capacitance tomography. Measurement Science and Technology, 14, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, M. (2002). Inverse solutions for electrical impedance tomography based on conjugate gradients methods. Measurement Science and Technology, 13, 101–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electronic and Information EngineeringBeijing Jiaotong UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations