Alternating Current Electric Flux Leakage Testing for Defect Detection and Characterization

  • Yanhua Sun
  • Shiwei Liu
  • Zhijian Ye
  • Min Gu
  • Changde Liu
  • Yihua Kang
  • Lingsong He


This paper analyzes the inspection characteristics of the alternating current electric flux leakage (AC-EFL) testing method. Three specimens with different conductivity are prepared, and a series of experiments is carried out to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the AC-EFL method. For metal materials that carry an alternating current (AC), defect detection can be realized using both AC-EFL and electric current perturbation (ECP). However, the signal noise ratio (SNR) from using the AC-EFL method is lower than that obtained using the ECP method according to the experimental results obtained from an aluminum plate. For both the Ni–Zn ferrite specimens with very low conductivity and the carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) specimens with low anisotropic conductivity, the ECP method failed to detect defects because of the weak disturbed magnetic field that was caused by the defects, whereas the AC-EFL method was able to realize the defect detection. These proof-of-concept experimental results indicate that compared to magnetic field testing method, the AC-EFL is more suitable for inspecting low-conductivity materials.


AC-EFL ECP CFRP AC Conductivity 



This paper was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51475194), the National Key Basic Research Program of China (2014CB046706) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 2015MS015).


  1. 1.
    Hernandes, J.A., Assis, A.K.T.: Electric potential for a resistive toroidal conductor carrying a steady azimuthal current. Phys. Rev. E 68(4), 046611 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hernandes, J.A., Assis, A.K.T.: Surface charges and external electric field in a toroid carrying a steady current. Braz. J. Phys. 34, 1738–44 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hernandes, J.A., Assis, A.K.T.: Electric potential due to an infinite conducting cylinder with internal or external point charge. J. Electrostat. 63, 1115–31 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hernandes, J.A., Mania, A.J., Luna, F.R.T., et al.: The internal and external electric fields for a resistive toroidal conductor carrying a steady poloidal current. Phys. Scripta 78(1), 015403 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ye, Z., Sun, Y., Kang, Y., et al.: An alternating current electric flux leakage testing methodology and experimental research for metallic materials. NDT E Int. 67, 36–45 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ye, Z., Kang, Y., Sun, Y., Yang, G., Feng, B., Zhou, Q.: Theoretical analyses of an alternating current electric flux leakage inspection method and experimental verification. Insight-Non-Destruct. Test. Cond. Monit. 57, 78–84 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beissner, R., Sablik, M.: Theory of Electric Current Perturbation Probe Optimization, Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, pp. 633–641. Springer, New York (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Beissner, R., Teller, C., Burkhardt, G., Smith, R., Barton, J.: Detection and Analysis of Electric-Current Perturbation Caused by Defects. Eddy-Current Characterization of Materials and Structures, pp. 428–446. ASTM International, West Conshohocken (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burkhardt, G.L., Beissne, R.E.: Electric Current Perturbation NDE, pp. 136–42. ASM Handbook Committee, Materials Park (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bowler, N.: Electric field due to alternating current injected at the surface of a metal plate. J Appl. Phys. 96, 4607–13 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bowler, N.: Analytical solution for the electric field in a half space conductor due to alternating current injected at the surface. J Appl. Phys. 95, 344–8 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schulze, M.H., Heuer, H., Küttner, M., Meyendorf, N.: High-resolution eddy current sensor system for quality assessment of carbon fiber materials. Microsyst. Technol. 16, 791–7 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mook, G., Lange, R., Koeser, O.: Non-destructive characterisation of carbon-fibre-reinforced plastics by means of eddy-currents. Compos. Sci. Technol. 61, 865–73 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheng, J., Ji, H., Qiu, J., Takagi, T., Uchimoto, T., Hu, N.: Novel electromagnetic modeling approach of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer laminate for calculation of eddy currents and eddy current testing signals. J. Compos. Mater. 49(5), 617–631 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yin, W., Li, X., Withers, P., Peyton, A.: Non-contact characterization of hybrid aluminium/carbon-fibre-reinforced plastic sheets using multi-frequency eddy-current sensors. Meas. Sci. Technol. 21, 105708 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koyama, K., Hoshikawa, H., Kojima, G.: Eddy current nondestructive testing for carbon fiber-reinforced composites. J. Press. Vessel Technol. 135, 041501 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Science and EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina
  2. 2.Wuhan Marine Machinery Plant Co., Ltd.WuhanChina
  3. 3.China Ship Scientific Research Center (CSSRC)WuxiChina

Personalised recommendations