NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

NDT&E International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

Velocity effect analysis of dynamic magnetization in high speed

magnetic flux leakage inspection
Ping Wang a, Yunlai Gao a,n, GuiYun Tian a,b, Haitao Wang a
a
College of Automation Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210016, China
b
School of Automation Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, 611731, China

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The investigation described in this paper focuses on the velocity effect of dynamic magnetization and
Received 22 September 2013 magnetic hysteresis due to rapid relative motion between magnetizer and measured specimens in high-
Received in revised form speed magnetic flux leakage (MFL) inspection. Magnetization intensity and permeability of ferromag-
29 January 2014
netic materials along with the duration of dynamic magnetization process were analyzed. Alteration of
Accepted 13 February 2014
the intensity and distribution of magnetic field leakage caused by permeability of specimen were
Available online 20 February 2014
investigated via theoretical analysis and finite-element method (FEM) combined with the actual high-
Keywords: speed MFL test. Following this, a specially designed experimental platform, in which motion velocity is
Velocity effect within the range of 5 m/s–55 m/s, was employed to verify the velocity effect and probability of a high-
Dynamic magnetization
speed MFL test. Preliminary results indicate that the MFL technique can achieve effective defect
Magnetic hysteresis
inspection at high speeds with the maximum inspection speed of about 200 km/h being verified under
MFL
High-speed inspection laboratory conditions.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and interpretation of MFL signals to many factors, such as the

Magnetic flux leakage testing is an efficient electromagnetic
non-destructive testing (NDT) [1] technique that has been exten-
sively used for defect inspection and characterization of ferromag-
netic materials such as pipelines, pressure vessels, rail tracks and
wheels, ropes or cables, etc. Magnetic flux lines generated by a
magnetizer are coupled into test specimens with air coupling. Any
geometrical discontinuity or local anomalies are manifested as an
abrupt change of magnetic permeability [2–4] and force magnetic
flux to leak out of the specimen in the poles of yoke in the air.
Leakage magnetic field which contains information of defect is
collected by magnetic field sensors and used to evaluate the defect
dimensions and structural performance. For the advantages of its
simplicity, low cost, air coupling and non-contact application, MFL
testing is extremely suitable for the automated in-line and real
time defect inspection. Some advancing works such as 3-D sensing
of magnetic field [5–7], pulsed electromagnetic method (PMFL/
PMR) [8–10] and orthogonal magnetization [11] are currently
under different stages of development and application for descrip-
tion of the shape and dimensions of defect.
Although this method has a high probability of defect inspec-
tion, it still fraught with problems associated with the sensitivity
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gaoyunlai@hotmail.com (Y.L. Gao).
condition of magnetization, inspection velocity, the B–H curves
[4] of a specimen, lift-off, etc. Additionally, a conventional magne-
tostatic model is unsuitable for the high-speed MFL test. Eddy
current distributed in conductors induced by relative movement
between the MFL probe and a specimen will alter the profile and
intensity of magnetic field leakage and distort the profile of MFL
signals [12–17]. It also brings about difficulty in the signal inter-
pretation and description of the defect. The target of improving
the probability and accuracy of defect inspection has been
attempted in previous work. Many numerical simulations based
on 2-D or 3-D transient FEM models were carried out to simulate
the distribution of motion-induced eddy currents and analyze
their effect on MFL signals [13–20]. In addition, some methods on
compensation and velocity invariance of MFL signal to minimize
the velocity-induced eddy current effect have been introduced in
previous papers [3,17–19]. Motion-induced eddy currents have
also been utilized in the description of stress corrosion cracks in
terms of measuring perturbation fields [21].
The magnetic flux lines flowing into a test specimen and the
magnetization intensity are very important for the sensitivity of
MFL signals and the defect inspection ability [2–4]. However,
numerical simulation in previous work of the velocity effect only
concentrated on the motion-induced eddy current and their
influence on MFL signals; the factors of dynamic magnetization
and the hysteresis effect during the high speed MFL test were

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2014.02.001
0963-8695 & 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
8 P. Wang et al. / NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12
neglected. The hysteresis effect exists in the dynamic magnetiza-
tion process accompanying the magnetic domain rotation and
domain wall movements which shows Barkhausen noise (BN) and
magnetic hysteresis loop. The duration of the magnetization
process decreases with the increase of inspection velocity because
of the constant distance between sensor and the starting point of
magnetization. If the higher inspection velocity and shorter time
of the magnetization process bring about impact on the dynamic
magnetization process, magnetization intensity and permeability
of specimen as well as leakage magnetic field will be altered. This
paper addressed the problem on the velocity effect of dynamic
magnetization and magnetic hysteresis during high speed MFL
inspection. In dynamic magnetization process, the distribution of
magnetic resistance around defect and the velocity effect on
specimen permeability and detection signals during the high
speed MFL inspection have been analyzed, and verified in FEM
simulation and actual high speed test. The rest of this paper is
organized as follows: Section 2 describes the theoretical analysis
of the dynamic magnetization and its effect on magnetic resis-
tance and field distribution. Section 3 presents FEM simulation on
magnetic field leakage along with the permeability of specimen on
the basis of magnetization due to velocity effect. Section 4
elaborates on the experimental study with a specially designed
high-speed MFL inspection platform. And then, derived conclu-
sions will be given in Section 5.
2. Theoretical analysis of the dynamic magnetization effect
2.1. Ferromagnetic magnetization
Ferromagnetic material is composed of many small sponta-
neous magnetization areas called magnetic domains, and the
transition area between adjacent magnetic domains is called the
magnetic domain wall. Magnetic domains distributed in the
spontaneous magnetization direction and the ferromagnet do
not show magnetism outward when the object is not magnetized.
When an extra external magnetic field is applied to the specimen,
magnetic domains flip and rotate in the direction of the applied
magnetic field accompanied with the domain wall movements.
Fig. 1 illustrates the initial magnetization curve [22] of the
ferromagnetic material with four stages showing the dynamic
change during magnetization and the variation of micro-level
magnetic domain and domain wall structures [23]. When all the
magnetic moments of domains tends to be consistent with applied
magnetic field direction and the magnetization intensity no longer
Fig. 1. Initial magnetization curve of the ferromagnetic material, (I) reversible
magnetic domain wall motion, (II) irreversible domain wall motion, (III) reversible
domain wall motion and domain magnetization rotation, and (VI) only domain
magnetization rotation [22].
increases, it means that the specimen is to be saturation
magnetized.
The magnetization process is governed by the following equa-
tions
∑m0
M¼ ¼ χmH ð1Þ
V
B ¼ μ0 H þ μ0 M ¼ μ0 ð1 þ χ m ÞH ¼ μ0 μr H ¼ μH ð2Þ
where M, H, B and V, respectively, represent magnetization
intensity, magnetic field intensity, magnetic flux density and
volume of the magnetized specimen; ∑m0 and χ m , respectively,
are the sum of magnetic moments in a certain volume and the
magnetic susceptibility of specimen; μ0 and μr denote the perme-
ability of air and relative magnetic permeability of materials with
respect to air, and μ represents the absolute permeability of the
medium. During the magnetization process, the variation of
magnetic flux density B in a specimen lags behind the applied
field H by a phase-shift because of the internal magnetic damping
and some energy losses in specimen according to Jiles–Atherton
model [24–26] and Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert (LLG) equation [27,28]
which is famous for the description of dynamic magnetization
process. After the applied field is revoked, ferromagnetic specimen
can still keep part of original magnetism, which is called the
magnetic hysteresis phenomenon [29–31]. This phenomenon is
the result of irreversible migration of the magnetic domain wall,
which is affected by the internal friction of magnetic materials
[23], the damping effect of micro eddy currents around a moving
domain wall [23], the stress of specimen, material hardness and
impurities, lattice defects, and so on. It can cause the resistance of
the migration of magnetic domain wall and rotation of magnetic
domains. According to the magnetic hysteresis phenomenon, the
∑m0 will be decreased due to the velocity effect of dynamic
magnetization. It will lead to the decrease of χ m and the perme-
ability of magnetized specimen [22–31].
2.2. Dynamic magnetization effect of the high-speed MFL inspection
A conventional MFL testing model [6] using a yoke-electro-
magnet is illustrated below in Fig. 2. The MFL probe incorporates a
magnetizer and the sensor travels on the specimen along the
scanning direction at a certain velocity (V). MFL signals are the
magnitudes of leakage magnetic field measured by sensors posi-
tioned in the middle of the two magnet poles and at a constant
distance over specimen (lift-off). The distance between two yoke-
electromagnet poles is a constant, represented as L in Fig. 2, which
is the valid magnetization distance in MFL inspection. The
dynamic magnetization processes during the high speed MFL
inspection is like a magnetization with a sinusoidal current of a
certain angular frequency ð2π Þ=T due to the applied magnetic field
induced by a moving yoke-electromagnet. The magnetic field
acting on the magnetized specimen first is zero, then increased
to the strength of the south-pole, it changes to the strength of the
horizontal field between the two poles, and decreases further to
the strength of the north-pole before reducing absolutely to zero
Fig. 2. A conventional magnetic flux leakage testing model [6].
 P. Wang et al. / NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12 9

again. Based on the valid magnetization distance, the duration
from the beginning to the end of dynamic magnetization process,
represented as T, can be described by Eq. (3) below, and the T
decreases with the increase of inspection velocity on the basis of
Eq. (3). According to the magnetic hysteresis phenomenon, the χ m
and permeability of a specimen will decrease due to the dynamic
magnetization in the high speed MFL inspection.
T ¼ L=V
As is shown in Fig. 2, magnetic resistance around the defect is
divided into two parts consisting of (a) and (b) in the boundaries of
the specimen surface. According to Ohm’s law for magnetic circuit,
magnetic resistance and flux can be described as shown in the
following equations:
lðbÞ
NI ¼ ϕ U Rm ¼ ϕðaÞ U RðaÞ ¼ ϕðbÞ U RðbÞ ¼ ϕðbÞ U
μðbÞ SðbÞ
ϕ ¼ ϕðaÞ þ ϕðbÞ
where NI, ϕ and Rm , respectively represent magnetomotive force,
magnetic flux and magnetic resistance in the whole magnetic
circuit, and ϕðaÞ , ϕðbÞ , RðaÞ and RðbÞ are the same concepts as
described above in position (a) and (b); lðbÞ and SðbÞ , respectively,
represent the length and cross-sectional area of magnetic circuit in
position (b); μðbÞ denotes permeability of specimen in position (b).
The permeability of a yoke-magnetizer and specimen is greater
than air, so resistance of the whole magnetic circuit mainly
depends upon the air gap. Magnetic flux of the whole circuit
basically remains unchanged regardless of the constant air gap and
ð3Þ
velocity-induced eddy current effect in high-speed MFL inspection
when the same defect is detected. With the decrease of μðbÞ and
the increase of RðbÞ due to the raise of inspection velocity, ϕðbÞ is
decreased and the opposite ϕðaÞ is increased according to Eqs.
(4) and (5) and Fig. 2. This phenomenon is just like the situation of
the difference between existence and absence of defect in MFL
inspection. From the above, magnetic flux leakage increases as the
ð4Þ increase in inspection velocity takes the dynamic magnetization
and magnetic hysteresis effect into account. Additionally, the effect
of motion-induced eddy current due to the relative movement
ð5Þ between applied magnetic field and specimen should be taken
into account in the high speed MFL inspection.

3. Simulation on the dynamic magnetization effect in high

speed MFL inspection

The electromagnetic FEM simulation models have been widely

Fig. 3. Simulation model for the analysis of velocity effect of dynamic magnetiza-
tion and magnetic hysteresis in high speed MFL inspection.
employed in solving Maxwell equations and providing guidance to
solve the engineering problems. The domain wall dynamics in
conjunction with microstructure is ongoing research to bridge the
gaps of micro and macro observation and modeling [32]. However,
the simulation of a static and transient FEM model does not take
the dynamic magnetization and magnetic hysteresis effect that is
present with the magnetic domain rotation and domain wall
movements into account. Hence, simulation on the velocity effect
of dynamic magnetization in high speed MFL inspection should
combine theoretical analysis and the actual test.

Table 1
The properties of simulation model.

Components Excitation coil Magnetizer Specimen Defect

Materials Copper Ferrite-yoke Steel_1008 Rectangular air slot

Properties Permeability μr ¼1; Permeability μr ¼ 5000; Permeability μr : having BH Permeability μr ¼1;
Conductivity ¼ 5.8e7 S/ Conductivity¼0.01 S/m curve, and variation with Conductivity¼ 0 S/m
m; Current the scope of constant 1–5000;
source¼ DC 20000A Conductivity ¼ 2e6 S/m

Fig. 4. Simulation results, (a) the leakage magnetic field of Bx component, (b) the leakage magnetic field of By component.
10 P. Wang et al. / NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12

3.1. Simulation set-up inspection velocity in high speed MFL inspection whilst the velocity-
induced eddy current effect is not taken into account.
Ansoft Maxwell EM V12 [33], one of the leading finite-element
software packages for numerical simulation, was employed to
analyze velocity effects of dynamic magnetization and magnetic 4. Experimental investigation of the high-speed MFL
hysteresis in high speed MFL inspection. As illustrated in Fig. 3, the inspection
model is set up in 2-D with X–Y coordinates representing the cross-
section of MFL probe and specimen. The simulation involves inves- For verifying experiments, a series of high-speed test on
tigation of the characterization of MFL signals with variations of specimens using MFL were carried out with the intention of
permeability in specimen due to the magnetic hysteresis phenom- measuring 3-D components of leakage magnetic field in different
enon and inspection velocity. The dimensions and properties of inspection velocities with the scope of 5 m/s–55 m/s. A specially
probe, specimen and defect are illustrated in Fig. 3 and Table 1. designed test platform and experimental models were employed
to give us some initial results that illustrate the capabilities of the
high speed MFL inspection.
3.2. Simulation results and analysis
4.1. Experimental set-up
According to theoretical analysis of the dynamic magnetization
and magnetic hysteresis effect, permeability of the specimen The sample is a circular turntable specimen that contains
changes with the magnetizing duration, whilst leakage magnetic surface-breaking defects on the edge of circle. The test specimen
field alters with motional velocity due to the variation of magnetic was designed completely according to the shape and size of rail
resistance around the defect in high-speed MFL inspection. Mag- head and material of specimen is same as one of U71Mn rail. A
netic intensity and permeability of the specimen is an approximate series of different types of artificial cracks are distributed on the
constant under the condition of a fixed inspection velocity or a specimen surface. Rotation linear velocity of the edge of circle is
constant state of magnetization. Hence, a constant equivalent within the range of 5 m/s–55 m/s under the drag of the motor in
permeability of magnetized material is proposed and permeability the high speed testing platform, with the block diagram and actual
of the specimen changing with the scope of 1–5000 compared
with the B–H curve of steel_1008 which is implemented in the
simulation. The magnitudes of leakage magnetic field are repre-
sented as the components of Bx and By along the line over
specimen and are observed and illustrated in Figs. 4 and 5.
As is shown in Fig. 4(a), the magnitude of Bx where there is no
defect increases with the decrease of equivalent permeability of
specimen. From the profile of leakage magnetic flux intensity
illustrated in Fig. 4(a) and (b) and Fig. 5, it is noticeable that
magnitudes of Bx and By components increase first and then
decrease with the decrease in permeability. The maximum magni-
tude shown in Fig. 5 is located at the turning point where the
equivalent permeability is 50. Moreover, the magnitude of MFL
signals with the specimen of steel_1008 having the B–H curve is
close to the situation that equivalent permeabilities are 20 or 150,
respectively. According to the magnetism and magnetization of
ferromagnetic materials, the equivalent permeability of steel_1008
is approximate close to 150, certainly, the actual permeability of
magnetized steel_1008 is very low due to the B–H curve. Hence, on
the basis of simulation results that equivalent permeability of speci- Fig. 6. The block diagram of high speed MFL test system.

men is greater than 50, the magnitude of MFL signals increases with
the decrease in permeability of specimen due to the increase in

Fig. 5. Simulation results: the magnitudes of Bx and By against equivalent

permeability of specimen. Fig. 7. The photograph of test platform.
 P. Wang et al. / NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12
platform photograph as shown in Figs. 6–8. The MFL test probe
consists of electromagnet of yoke-1 with DC excitation and 3-D
hall sensors are positioned at a constant distance of 1 mm over
specimen to detect leakage magnetic field and the defects indica-
tion is recorded. The surface of the magnet pole has a good
coupling with sample based on the radian and shape of specimen.
The relative movement is realized by the rotating turntable
specimen and by keeping the MFL probe still to simulate the
actual high speed MFL test. Two opposite yoke-electromagnets
were employed to magnetize the specimen to avoid the repeated
magnetization during multicycle rotation and increase the diffi-
culty of magnetization before the test.
The MFL inspection devices include six parts: magnetizer
of yoke-1, reverse magnetizer of yoke-2, 3-D hall sensors, signal
conditioning circuit, data acquisition card and the PC for data
processing and display as shown in Figs. 6–8. Two yoke-
electromagnets made of silicon steel sheet material cover the
whole surface of specimen. Excitation of the copper coils around
Fig. 8. The simplified experimental model (top view) of high-speed MFL test in the
platform.
Fig. 9. Experimental results of the MFL test in different inspection velocities, (a) the Bx component of MFL signals, (b) the By component of MFL signals, (c) the Bz component
of MFL signals, (d) the magnitudes of MFL signals against inspection velocity.
11
the yoke-1 and yoke-2 arm is from a DC stabilized voltage supply
and the generated magnetic field of yoke-2 is greater than that of
yoke-1. The 3-D hall sensors are composed of three UGN3503
elements which were positioned closely and perpendicular to each
other in order to measure three components of magnetic field.
The Bz component is perpendicular to the surface of specimen, Bx
and By components are both parallel to the material surface, and
parallel and orthogonal to the applied magnetization field, respec-
tively. The amplifier AD620 is employed to magnify the MFL
signals by 100 times. A high-speed data acquisition card of DAQ-
2204 is used to obtain data, which is then processed in MATLAB,
and the sampling frequency is set to 150 kHz according to the
space and time according to Shannon’s sampling theorem.
4.2. Experimental results & analysis
As is shown in Fig. 8, a surface-breaking artificial crack, with
the depth 8 mm and width 0.4 mm, was selected to analyze. The
MFL signals from 3-D hall sensors against inspection velocity were
illustrated in Fig. 9. Inspection velocity is in the range from 5 m/s
to 55 m/s, and the step is 5 m/s.
As is shown in Fig. 9(a)–(d), the magnitudes of three compo-
nents of magnetic signals where there is no defect increase with
the increase in inspection velocity whilst the increasing gradient is
monotone decreasing. The profiles of MFL signals are analogous
with the variation of inspection velocity because of the tiny width
of defect, but it can be seen that the concave–convex profile of Bz
is not symmetrical. Due to the fact that the defect is approximately
perpendicular to the applied magnetic field, the magnitude of By
component is less than Bx and Bz. With the increase in inspection
velocity, the magnitudes of the three components of MFL signals
are nonlinear monotone increasing and the increasing gradient of
12
Bx and Bz is greater than By. The magnitudes of MFL signals
M MFL  signals which contain Bx, By and Bz components are affected
by many factors such as lift-off Llif t  of f , excitation current I excitation
of yoke-electromagnet, parameters of defect P def ect , thickness of
specimen H specimen , inspection velocity V inspection , the sensitivity of
magnetic sensors Ssensor , the magnification of amplifying circuit
M amplif y , and so on. The relationship between these impact factors
and magnitudes of MFL signals is described in Eq. (6) with a
function f . The simple relationship between inspection velocity
and magnitude of detection signals is difficult to specify due to the
complex changes of other impact factors in different inspection
conditions.
M MFL  signals
¼ f ðLlif t  of f ; I excitation ; P def ect ; H specimen ; V inspection ; Ssensor ; Mamplif y ; :::Þ
On the basis of the theoretical analysis on dynamic magnetiza-
tion and its effect on the magnetic resistance and field distribution
in high speed MFL inspection, the experimental results under the
range of inspection velocity from 5 m/s to 55 m/s are in good
agreement with simulation results.
5. Conclusion
The relative movement between the applied magnetic field and
measured specimen can shorten the duration of the magnetization
process and induce eddy current in conductive ferromagnetic
materials in high speed MFL inspection. It will alter the distribu-
tion and intensity of magnetic field and influence MFL signals. This
paper has presented the theoretical analysis of dynamic magneti-
zation and magnetic hysteresis and their effects on magnetic
resistance and field distribution around the defect over the speci-
men. Then, an FEM simulation has been carried out to analyze
the velocity effect of dynamic magnetization and permeability
of specimen. Finally, a specially designed experiment has been
implemented to verify the velocity effect and probability of the
high-speed MFL inspection. Initial investigation results indicate
the applicability of high speed MFL inspection and the maximum
inspection velocity (approximately 200 km/h) has been verified
under laboratory conditions. With the increase in velocity, the
magnitudes of MFL signals are nonlinear monotone increasing and
the sensitivity of signals is more significant. Under the experi-
mental conditions in this paper, the magnetic hysteresis and
dynamic magnetization effect are the main factors affecting
leakage magnetic field relative to the blocking effect of velocity-
induced eddy current in velocity effect. Further domain wall
dynamics observation and modeling, dynamics of magnetization
and quantitative velocity effects in microstructure and cracks will
be studied [32,34].
Acknowledgment
The work in this paper was supported by the FP7 “NDE and
SHM for Health Monitoring of Offshore Wind Farm (HEMOW)”
(FP7-PEOPLE-2010-IRSES) project, National Science Foundation of
China (50907032/E070104 and 51377015), “Simulation and reali-
zation of integration of electromagnetic NDT methods for online
high speed railway inspection”, and Shanghai railway bureau
project funding “High-speed railway seamless rail temperature
stress and the crack detection system”.
References
[1] Sophian A, Tian GY, Taylor D, Rudlin J. Electromagnetic and eddy current NDT:
a review. Insight 2001;43(5):302–6.
P. Wang et al. / NDT&E International 64 (2014) 7–12
[2] Katoh M, Masumoto N, Nishio K, Yamaguchi T. Modeling of the yoke-
magnetization in MFL-testing by finite elements. NDT E Int 2003;36
(7):479–86.
[3] Mandayam S, Udpa L, Udpa SS, Lord W. Invariance transformations for
magnetic flux leakage signals. IEEE Trans Magn 1996;32(3):1577–80.
[4] Katoh M, Nishio K, Yamaguchi T. The influence of modeled B–H curve on the
density of the magnetic leakage flux due to a flaw using yoke-magnetization.
NDT E Int 2004;37(8):603–9.
[5] Dutta SA, Ghorbel FH, Stanley RK. Simulation and analysis of 3-D magnetic flux
leakage. IEEE Trans Magn 2009;45(4):1966–72.
[6] Li Y, Wilson J, Tian GY. Experiment and simulation study of 3D magnetic field
sensing for magnetic flux leakage defect characterisation. NDT E Int 2007;40
(2):179–84.
[7] Wilson JW, Tian GY. 3D magnetic field sensing for magnetic flux leakage
defect characterisation. Insight 2006;48(6):357–9.
[8] Sophian A, Tian GY, Zairi S. Pulsed magnetic flux leakage techniques for crack
detection and characterisation. Sens Actuators A-Phys 2006;125(2):186–91.
ð6Þ [9] Wilson JW, Kaba M, Tian GY, Licciardi S. Feature extraction and integration for
the quantification of PMFL data. Nondestruct Test Eval 2010;2 5(2):101–9.
[10] Wilson JW, Tian GY. Pulsed electromagnetic methods for defect detection and
characterisation. NDT E Intl 2007;40(4):275–83.
[11] Sun YH, Kang YH. High-speed magnetic flux leakage technique and apparatus
based on orthogonal magnetization for steel pipe. Mater Eval 2010;68
(4):452–8.
[12] Niikura S, Kameari A. Analysis Of eddy-current and force in conductors with
motion. IEEE Trans Magn 1992;28(2):1450–3.
[13] Du ZY, Ruan JJ, Peng Y, Yu SF, Zhang Y, Gan Y, et al. 3-D FEM simulation of
velocity effects on magnetic flux leakage testing signals. IEEE Trans Magn
2008;44(6):1642–5.
[14] Gan Z, Chai X Numerical simulation on magnetic flux leakage testing of the
steel cable at different speed title. In: Proceedings of the International
Conference on Electronics and Optoelectronics, 2011. 3316-3319.
[15] Li Y, Tian GY, Ward S. Numerical simulation on magnetic flux leakage
evaluation at high speed. NDT E Int 2006;39(5):367–73.
[16] Li Y, Tian GY, Ward S. Numerical simulations on electromagnetic NDT at high
speed. Insight 2006;48(2):103–8.
[17] Katragadda G, Sun YS, Lord W, Udpa SS, Uidpa L. Velocity Effects and Their
Minimization in Mfl Inspection of Pipelines: A Numerical Study. New York:
Plenum Press Div Plenum Publishing Corp; 1995.
[18] Park GS, Park SH. Analysis of the velocity-induced eddy current in MFL type
NDT. IEEE Trans Magn 2004;40(2):663–6.
[19] Yang LJ, Ma FM, Wang DW, Gao SW. Velocity effect and signal process in high-
speed magnetic flux leakage inspection. Hong Kong: International Academic
Publishers Ltd; 2005.
[20] Chen ZJ, Xuan JQ, Wang P, Wang HT, Tian GY Simulation on High Speed Rail
Magnetic Flux Leakage Inspection.In: Proceedings of the IEEE International
Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference.2011. 760-764.
[21] Yang S, Sun Y, Udpa L, Udpa SS, Lord W. 3D simulation of velocity induced
fields for nondestructive evaluation application. IEEE Trans Magn 1999;35
(3):1754–6.
[22] Stefanita Garmen-Gabriela. Magnetism Basics and Applications. New York:
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2011.
[23] Cullity BD, Graham CD. Introduction to Magnetic Materials. 2nd Edition. New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2009.
[24] Jiles DC, Atherton DL. Ferromagnetic hysteresis. IEEE Trans Magn 1983;19
(5):2183–5.
[25] Laudani A, Fulginei FR, Salvini A. Comparative analysis of Bouc–Wen and Jiles–
Atherton models under symmetric excitations. Physica B 2014;435:134–7.
[26] Miltat J, Albuquerque G, Thiaville A. An introduction to micromagnetics in the
dynamic regime. In: Hillebrands B, Ounadjela K, editors. Spin Dynamics in
Confined Magnetic Structures I, Topics Applied Physics, 83; 2002. p. 1–34.
[27] Gilbert TL. A phenomenological theory of damping in ferromagnetic materials.
IEEE Trans Magn 2004;40(6):3443–9.
[28] Cimrák I, Slodička M. An iterative approximation scheme for the Landau–
Lifshitz–Gilbert equation. J Comput Appl Math 2004;169:17–32.
[29] Jiles DC, Atherton DL. Theory of ferromagnetic hysteresis. J Appl Phys
1984;55:2115–20.
[30] Jiles DC. Hysteresis models: non-linear magnetism on length scales from the
atomistic to the macroscopic. J Magn Magn Mater 2002;242:116–24.
[31] Hauser Hans. Energetic model of ferromagnetic hysteresis. J Appl Phys
1994;75:2584–97.
[32] Batista L, Rabe U, Altpeter I, Hirsekorn S, Dobmann G. On the mechanism of
nondestructive evaluation of cementite content in steels using a combination
of magnetic Barkhausen noise and magnetic force microscopy techniques.
J Magn Magn Mater 2014;354:248–56.
[33] ANSOFT Corporation. Maxwell EM V12 Manual; 2008. 〈http://www.ansoft.
com/〉.
[34] Ferré Jacques, Metaxas Peter J, Mougin Alexandra, Jamet Jean-Pierre, Gorchon
Jon, Jeudy Vincent. Universal magnetic domain wall dynamics in the presence
of weak disorder. Comptes Rendus Phys 2013;14(8):651–66.