Electromagnetic imaging methods for nondestructive evaluation applications - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2011;11(12):11774-808.
doi: 10.3390/s111211774. Epub 2011 Dec 19.

Electromagnetic imaging methods for nondestructive evaluation applications

Affiliations
Review

Electromagnetic imaging methods for nondestructive evaluation applications

Yiming Deng et al. Sensors (Basel). 2011.

Abstract

Electromagnetic nondestructive tests are important and widely used within the field of nondestructive evaluation (NDE). The recent advances in sensing technology, hardware and software development dedicated to imaging and image processing, and material sciences have greatly expanded the application fields, sophisticated the systems design and made the potential of electromagnetic NDE imaging seemingly unlimited. This review provides a comprehensive summary of research works on electromagnetic imaging methods for NDE applications, followed by the summary and discussions on future directions.

Keywords: electromagnetic imaging; nondestructive evaluation; noninvasive imaging; structural health monitoring.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
General schematic of electromagnetic NDE imaging system.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
MFL inspection and imaging of gas pipelines.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Results obtained from the application of the noise cancelation algorithm [8]. (a) Raw MFL image; (b) Output after SPN cancelation; (c) Final de-noised image.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Feedback neural network configuration.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Image reconstruction results showing coarse to fine predication of the depth profile.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Flowchart of space mapping optimization.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Composed images of the artificial grooved rhombic defect.
Figure 8.
Figure 8.
Composed images of the artificial hollowed rhombic defect.
Figure 9.
Figure 9.
Side and top view of the electrode design.
Figure 10.
Figure 10.
EIT system schematic developed at Stanford University.
Figure 11.
Figure 11.
Typical ECT system with an eight electrode sensor, with sensing field boundaries shown.
Figure 12.
Figure 12.
Reconstruction of four plastic rods shown in (left) from experimental data is shown in (middle). The normalized two norm of the mismatch error between measured and simulated capacitance is shown in (right).
Figure 13.
Figure 13.
Numerical reconstructions from noisy synthetic data. On the top left is the true loss profile; on the top right is the profile obtained using least squares; and on the bottom row are the effects of adding positivity and total variation penalty.
Figure 14.
Figure 14.
Comparison of eddy current and acoustic microscopic images of a coarse grained Ti-6Al-4V sample from nearly the same area of the sample.
Figure 15.
Figure 15.
Eddy current images of small fatigue cracks in 2024 aluminum and Ti-6Al-4V samples.
Figure 16.
Figure 16.
A general schematic of eddy current imaging setup using AFM.
Figure 17.
Figure 17.
Topography and eddy current image obtained on Titanium alloy.
Figure 18.
Figure 18.
Block diagram of PEC imaging system.
Figure 19.
Figure 19.
Schematic of the PEC-GMR imaging system.
Figure 20.
Figure 20.
C-scan images derived from the transient GMR signals.
Figure 21.
Figure 21.
Top view of PET probe in direction of magnetic induction flux.
Figure 22.
Figure 22.
C-scan imaging results of three typical defects.
Figure 23.
Figure 23.
Schematic of the MOI system.
Figure 24.
Figure 24.
Schematic of the LMOI.
Figure 25.
Figure 25.
EC-MO images of a two layer riveted lap joint.
Figure 26.
Figure 26.
Schematic diagram of GMR-based self-nulling probe with active feedback.
Figure 27.
Figure 27.
Schematic of SV-GMR based ECT probe.
Figure 28.
Figure 28.
Schematic of the GMI based probe.
Figure 29.
Figure 29.
A typical microwave imaging system setup.
Figure 30.
Figure 30.
A typical radar imaging setup.
Figure 31.
Figure 31.
Modulated scattering microwave imaging system schematic.
Figure 32.
Figure 32.
Block scheme of Pastorino microwave imaging system published in 2007.
Figure 33.
Figure 33.
Pastorino microwave imaging system: illumination and measurement part of the experimental setup.
Figure 34.
Figure 34.
Civil structure model.
Figure 35.
Figure 35.
THz transmission images in 0.1 THz bandwidths from 0.1–0.2 THz through 0.9–1.0 THz. Note the improvement in spatial resolution with increasing THz frequency.
Figure 36.
Figure 36.
Picture of the fatigue crack obtained with a microscope (left) and the 90 GHz image (right) of the crack obtained at standoff distance of 0.8 mm. Solid arrows show the indication of crack non–uniformities and dash arrow shows the indication of pitting.
Figure 37.
Figure 37.
Reflection terahertz images.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Tricoles G., Farhat N.H. Microwave holography: Applications and techniques. Proc. IEEE. 1977;65:108–121.
    1. Deng Y. Michigan State University; East Lansing, MI, USA: 2009. Forward and Inverse Problems in Noninvasive Imaging Techniques. Ph.D. Thesis,
    1. Zhu Y.K., Tian G.Y., Lu R.S., Zhang H. A review of optical NDT technologies. Sensors. 2011;11:7773–7798. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Achenbach J. Quantitative nondestructive evaluation. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2000;37:13–27.
    1. Jiles D.C. Review of magnetic methods for nondestructive evaluation. NDT Int. 1988;21:311–319.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources