sensors
Article
Mechanism of Magnetic Flux Leakage Detection Method Based
on the Slotted Ferromagnetic Lift-Off Layer
Jian Tang 1 , Rongbiao Wang 2 , Gongzhe Qiu 1 , Yu Hu 1 and Yihua Kang 1, *
Citation: Tang, J.; Wang, R.; Qiu, G.;
Hu, Y.; Kang, Y. Mechanism of
Magnetic Flux Leakage Detection
Method Based on the Slotted
Ferromagnetic Lift-Off Layer. Sensors
2022, 22, 3587. https://doi.org/
10.3390/s22093587
Academic Editor: Giovanni Betta
Received: 15 April 2022
Accepted: 7 May 2022
Published: 9 May 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093587
1 School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,
Wuhan 430074, China; tangj@hust.edu.cn (J.T.); qiugongzhe@hust.edu.cn (G.Q.); huyuhy@hust.edu.cn (Y.H.)
2 Key Laboratory of Nondestructive Testing, Ministry of Education, Nanchang Hangkong University,
Nanchang 330063, China; wangrongbiao@nchu.edu.cn
* Correspondence: yihuakang@hust.edu.cn
Abstract: Magnetic flux leakage (MFL) testing is widely used in non-destructive testing of ferromag-
netic components. In view of the serious attenuation of the leakage magnetic field (LMF) caused by
the transmission of LMF in the lift-off layer between the measuring point and the workpiece, this
paper introduces an MFL detection method based on the slotted ferromagnetic lift-off layer (SFLL).
The conventional non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer is changed to a ferromagnetic lift-off layer with a
rectangular slot. The magnetic sensor is fixed above the slot and scans the workpiece together with
the lift-off layer. First, the detection mechanism of the new method was studied by an equivalent
LMF coil model. The permeability perturbation effect and the magnetization enhancement effect
were analyzed in the new method. Based on the detection mechanism, the lift-off tolerance of the
new method was investigated. Then, the LMF enhancement and lift-off tolerance of the new method
in the steel plate detection model were studied. Finally, experiments were conducted to compare the
new method with the conventional method. The simulation and experimental results show that the
slotted ferromagnetic lift-off layer enhances the amplitude of the MFL signal and is tolerant to the
lift-off value. This method provides a new idea for optimizing the design of the MFL sensor and
improving the sensitivity of MFL detection at a large lift-off value.
Keywords: magnetic flux leakage (MFL) testing; permeability perturbation; slotted ferromagnetic
lift-off layer (SFLL); leakage magnetic field (LMF) enhancement; lift-off tolerance
1. Introduction
Ferromagnetic components, such as steel pipes and steel plates, are key industrial
components, which are widely applied in petrochemical, high-pressure equipment, ther-
mal equipment, and engineering structures. The international standard stipulates those
important ferromagnetic components must undergo non-destructive testing (NDT) after
manufacture. Common NDT methods include eddy current testing (ECT) [1,2], ultrasonic
testing (UT) [3,4], magnetic particle inspection (MPI) [5,6], and magnetic flux leakage (MFL)
testing [7–10]. ECT has the advantages of high sensitivity and non-contact. However, due
to the skin effect, it can only detect surface defects and has strict requirements on surface
quality. UT can detect internal defects but requires couplant. MPI has high sensitivity and
can image defects directly, but the level of automation is not high. MFL has the advantages
of low cost, no pollution, fast speed, and a high level of automation. In addition, internal
and external defects can be detected by MFL. Therefore, it is widely used in automated
NDT of ferromagnetic components [11–13].
In MFL detection, the lift-off value is one of the most important parameters. The
amplitude of the leakage magnetic field (LMF) decreases rapidly with the increase of the
lift-off value, which leads to a decrease in detection sensitivity [14,15]. Therefore, how to
improve the detection sensitivity at a large lift-off has been a key issue in MFL detection.
Many scholars have also conducted related research.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors
 tiny cracks.
Some scholars believe that placing an iron pla
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 “magnetic shielding effect” [23,24] for the LMF, 2 of 14 so
rarely applied in MFL testing. However, Wu J. propo
onTothe improve“magnetic guiding
the detection sensitivity at a largeeffect”.
lift-off, manyExperiments
highly sensitive magnetic show
sensitive elements have been applied in MFL detection, such as high-sensitivity Hall
ferromagnetic
element, lift-off layer
anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) [16],willgiantweaken
magnetoresistance the(GMR)LMF [17],at the
and tunnel magnetoresistance (TMR) [18]. Meanwhile, the new sensor design also improves
strong
the sensitivitymagnetization,
of the MFL detection. Sun Y. the
added LMF at magnetic
an external the measuringsource above the poin
probe. Through the mutual interference between the magnetic field generated by the
viously,
external magneticwe sourcehave introduced
and the LMF an MFL
of the defect, the sensitivity of the method based
sensor at large lift-
off was improved [19]. Wang R. added an AC excitation coil next to the induction coil sensor.
with
The a through
high-frequency magnetic groove
field generated [26].
by the InAC coilthis paper,
was used wethefurthe
to modulate
ferromagnetic lift-off layer (SFLL) on the LMF. Furth
low-frequency LMF of the defect. This method enhances the detection sensitivity at large
lift-off [20]. Lee J. arranged the sensor array on the surface of the semicircular ferrofluid and
mechanism
concentrated the LMF of thetheSFLL-MFL
through semicircular ferrofluid method and itswhich
with high permeability,
improves the sensitivity of the probe [21]. Wu J. proposed a lift-off tolerant probe based
lift-off t
ventional
on the “magnetic fieldair/non-ferromagnetic
focusing effect”. A ferrite core was embeddedlift-offin anlayer,inductionitcoilcan o
to increase the leakage magnetic flux in the induction coil [22]. The existing literature
more
on the MFL tolerant to theat achange
detection sensitivity large lift-offof the lift-off
is extensive and focuses layer thickne
particularly
on the sensor. The lift-off layer is the area between the sensor and the workpiece. No
Thiswhat
matter method
method, the provides
LMF must pass througha new idea
the lift-off layerfor
whenimproving
it is transmitted to the
the measuring point, but the lift-off layer is always ignored in the previous research. In
tection
the and
conventional MFLhasmethod,the potential
the lift-off to air
layer is always beor used in combinatio
other non-ferromagnetic
materials, as shown in Figure 1. The LMF decays rapidly in the high magnetoresistance
obtain a greater MFL signal further.
non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer. It may result in failure to detect tiny cracks.

Figure 1. The lift-off layer and lift-off value in MFL testing.

Figure 1. The lift-off layer and lift-off value in MFL testing.
Some scholars believe that placing an iron plate on the workpiece will cause a “mag-
netic shielding effect” [23,24] for the LMF, so the ferromagnetic lift-off layer is rarely applied
in MFL testing. However, Wu J. proposed an MFL testing method based on the “magnetic
2. Mechanism
guiding effect”. Experiments show that under low magnetization, the ferromagnetic lift-off
layer will weaken the LMF at the measuring point. However, under strong magnetization,
2.1. MFL Detection Method Based on the Slotted Ferromag
the LMF at the measuring point increased by about 38% [25]. Previously, we have intro-
duced an MFL method based on the ferromagnetic lift-off layer with a through groove [26].
Although the ferromagnetic lift-off layer has a
In this paper, we further analyze the effect of the slotted ferromagnetic lift-off layer (SFLL)
on the LMF. Furthermore, we focus on exploring the mechanism of the SFLL-MFL method
LMF at a strong magnetization, the “magnetic shieldi
and its lift-off tolerance. Compared with the conventional air/non-ferromagnetic lift-off
layer, it can obtain a stronger MFL signal and is more tolerant to the change of the lift-off
order to eliminate the adverse effects of the “magneti
layer thickness by using the SFLL-MFL method. This method provides a new idea for
improving the sensitivity in large lift-off MFL detection and has the potential to be used in
combination with previous other methods to obtain a greater MFL signal further.

2. Mechanism
2.1. MFL Detection Method Based on the Slotted Ferromagnetic Lift-Off Layer
Although the ferromagnetic lift-off layer has a certain enhancement effect on the LMF
at a strong magnetization, the “magnetic shielding effect” cannot be eliminated. In order to
eliminate the adverse effects of the “magnetic shielding effect” and enhance the strength of
 layer to the measuring point, as shown in Figure 2.
Based on the ferromagnetic lift-off layer, a rectangular slot is manufactured. The
sensor is fixed at the measuring point on the slot and scans the workpiece with the lift-off
layer, as shown in Figure 2a. Different from the conventional air lift-off, the measured
magnetic field at the measuring point in the new method includes the LMF of the defect
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 3 of 14
and the slot. The measured magnetic field at the measuring point is defined as the
measuring point magnetic field. In the new method, the actual defect LMF is the differ-
ence between the measuring point magnetic field with and without defects.
the LMF further, the SFLL can force the LMF to leak out through the lift-off layer to the
measuring point, as shown in Figure 2.

(a) (b)
Figure 2.
Figure The method
2. The methodofofthe
theslotted ferromagnetic
slotted lift-off
ferromagnetic layerlayer
lift-off (a) without defectsdefects
(a) without and (b)and
with(b)
a with a
defect in the workpiece.
defect in the workpiece.
Based on the ferromagnetic lift-off layer, a rectangular slot is manufactured. The sensor
Under
is fixed the
at the magnetizing
measuring point field,
on the the
slot slot will generate
and scans an LMF.
the workpiece When
with the a defect
lift-off layer, is de-
tected, as shown in Figure 2b, the LMF of the slot leaks upward into
as shown in Figure 2a. Different from the conventional air lift-off, the measured magnetic the air where the
sensor
field atisthe
and also spreads
measuring point indownward into the
the new method workpiece
includes the LMFwhere the
of the defect
defect andis.the
The slot
slot. The
LMF measured
diffused down magnetic
increasesfieldthe
at the measuring point
magnetization is defined
of the defect.asMeanwhile,
the measuring point
for the lift-off
magnetic
layer, field. generated
the LMF In the new by method, the actual
the defect also defect LMFthe
enhances is the difference between
magnetization of thetheslot com-
measuring point magnetic field with and without defects.
pared to the absence of defects. The enhanced magnetization of the defect and the slot
Under the magnetizing field, the slot will generate an LMF. When a defect is detected,
means that they also generate stronger LMF. Therefore, compared with the
as shown in Figure 2b, the LMF of the slot leaks upward into the air where the sensor is
non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer, the SFLL can enhance the LMF of defects.
and also spreads downward into the workpiece where the defect is. The slot LMF diffused
down increases the magnetization of the defect. Meanwhile, for the lift-off layer, the LMF
2.2. The Mechanism
generated of LMF
by the defect Enhancement
also enhances the magnetization of the slot compared to the absence
of defects. The enhanced
According magnetization
to the above, of the defect
the new method and the
is based on slot
the means that theyof
enhancement also
magneti-
generate stronger LMF. Therefore, compared with the non-ferromagnetic
zation to increase the LMF, so magnetization is a key factor to study the enhancement lift-off layer, the
SFLL can enhance
mechanism. the LMF
However, of defects.
variables cannot be controlled singly due to the coupling between
the
2.2.defect LMF andofthe
The Mechanism LMFmagnetization
Enhancement of the SFLL. Because of the similarity of the spatial
distribution
According of the LMF
to the and
above, the
the newmagnetic
method isfield
basednear
on thetheenhancement
coil, the magnetic field generated
of magnetization
by an equivalent LMF coil in the horizontal direction was used
to increase the LMF, so magnetization is a key factor to study the enhancement mechanism. to replace the defect LMF
toHowever,
control variables
a single cannot
variable. When the
be controlled equivalent
singly due to the LMF coil is
coupling energized,
between it isLMF
the defect equivalent
for
anda the
defect; if not, it isofequivalent
magnetization for no defects.
the SFLL. Because of the similarity of the spatial distribution of
the LMF and the analysis
Stationary magnetic was field near the coil,
carried out the
withmagnetic field generated by
a two-dimensional an equivalent
finite element model.
This model is composed of a slotted iron plate, a magnetizing coil, and aansingle
LMF coil in the horizontal direction was used to replace the defect LMF to control equivalent
variable. When the equivalent LMF coil is energized, it is equivalent
LMF coil. The magnetizing coil produces a horizontal magnetization field in the for a defect; if not, it is slotted
equivalent for no defects.
iron plate. The equivalent LMF coil produces a local magnetization field around the slot.
Stationary analysis was carried out with a two-dimensional finite element model. This
The two magnetization fields have the same direction in the slotted iron plate. The rele-
model is composed of a slotted iron plate, a magnetizing coil, and an equivalent LMF
vant
coil. dimensions
The magnetizing are shown in Figure
coil produces 3. The width
a horizontal of the slotfield
magnetization wasinsettheasslotted
0.5 mm, ironand the
measuring point was
plate. The equivalent 0.3coil
LMF mm away from
produces a localthe upper surface
magnetization of the the
field around slotted iron plate
slot. The
(SFLL). The equivalent
two magnetization fieldscoil
have forthe
the defect
same had 100
direction turns
in the andiron
slotted a current of 0.5
plate. The A. The mag-
relevant
dimensionscoil
netization arehad
shown 1000inturns,
Figurewhose
3. Thecurrent
width ofwas the increased
slot was set as 0.5
from 0.5mm,
A toand 15 A thewith an
measuring
interval of point
0.5 A.was At0.3themm away
same fromthe
time, the thickness
upper surface of theof the
ironslotted
plateiron platealso
t was (SFLL).
increased
The equivalent coil for the defect had 100 turns and a current of
from 0.5 mm to 3 mm with an interval of 0.5 mm. The slotted iron plate (Q235) was con-0.5 A. The magnetization
coil had 1000 turns, whose current was increased from 0.5 A to 15 A with an interval of 0.5 A.
sidered to be isotropic ferromagnetic material. The B-H curve of carbon steel Q235 is
At the same time, the thickness of the iron plate t was also increased from 0.5 mm to 3 mm
with an interval of 0.5 mm. The slotted iron plate (Q235) was considered to be isotropic
ferromagnetic material. The B-H curve of carbon steel Q235 is shown in Table 1. The
mesh type was free triangular. In order to get better results, the fine mesh was generated
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15

Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 4 of 14

shown in Table 1. The mesh type was free triangular. In order to get better results, the
fine mesh was generated within the slot and measuring point region. The boundary
conditions between
within the slot air and ferromagnetic
and measuring point region. Thematerials
boundarymeet the continuity
conditions between airconditions
and of
ferromagnetic
magnetic fieldmaterials meet the
and magnetic continuity
induction conditions
intensity. Theofouter
magnetic field and
boundary of magnetic
the air domain
induction
satisfies intensity.
the boundaryThe condition
outer boundary
that of
thethe air domain
magnetic satisfies
flux the boundary
is parallel condition
to the boundary.
that the magnetic flux is parallel to the boundary.

Figure 3.
Figure Simulation model
3. Simulation modelforfor
thethe
mechanism of LMF
mechanism enhancement.
of LMF enhancement.

Table 1.
Table The B-H
1. The B-Hcurve
curveofofcarbon steel
carbon Q235.
steel Q235.

HH (A/m)
(A/m) B (T)B (T)

0 0 0 0
500 0.88529
5001000 0.88529
1.27739
1000
1500 1.27739
1.41839
2000
1500 1.48692
1.41839
2500 1.53552
2000
3000 1.48692
1.57709
4000
2500 1.64878
1.53552
5000 1.70842
3000
6000
1.57709
1.7579
4000
7000 1.64878
1.79885
8000
5000 1.83341
1.70842
9000 1.86285
6000
10,000 1.7579
1.88837
7000
15,000 1.79885
1.98345
20,000
8000 2.05073
1.83341
25,000 2.10193
9000 1.86285
10,000 1.88837
Simulation models corresponding to each parameter were simulated separately to
15,000
obtain the magnetic induction intensity Bon at the1.98345
measuring point. Then the magnetic
20,000 2.05073
induction intensity Boff is subtracted at the measuring point when the equivalent LMF coil
25,000
is not energized under the corresponding model. 2.10193
The defect LMF under different SFLL
thicknesses is obtained. The simulation results are shown in Figure 4.
The simulation
Simulation results
models show that whentot <
corresponding 1.5 mm,
each the LMFwere
parameter is almost unchanged
simulated at
separately to
first, then increases rapidly with the increase of magnetization, and finally it gradually
obtain the magnetic induction intensity Bon at the measuring point. Then the magnetic
decreases after reaching the maximum value. When t > 1.5 mm, the LMF is almost constant
induction intensity Boff is subtracted at the measuring point when the equivalent LMF coil
at first and then decreases slowly with the increase of the magnetization. It can be seen
isthat
nottheenergized under
magnetization the of
effect corresponding model.
the equivalent LMF coilThe defect
on the SFLLLMF under different
is inconsistent under SFLL
thicknesses is obtained. The simulation results are shown
different plate thicknesses. Therefore, further analysis is needed.in Figure 4.
 t = 0.5mm t = 1.0mm t = 1.5mm
t = 2.0mm t = 2.5mm t = 3.0mm
3.0

LMF intensity (mT)

Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2.5 5 of 15
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 5 of 14

2.0
3.5
1.5 t = 0.5mm t = 1.0mm t = 1.5mm
t = 2.0mm t = 2.5mm t = 3.0mm
3.0

LMF intensity (mT)

1.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
2.5 Magnetizing current (A)
Figure 4. The relationship between the intensity of the defect LMF and the magnetizing current
2.0different plate thicknesses t.
under

1.5
The simulation results show that when t < 1.5 mm, the LMF is almost unchanged at
first, then increases rapidly with the increase of magnetization, and finally it gradually
decreases
1.0 after reaching the maximum value. When t > 1.5 mm, the LMF is almost con-
0
stant at first and 2 4
then 6 8
decreases 10slowly 12 with14 the 16 increase of the magnetization. It can be
Magnetizing current (A)
seen that the magnetization effect of the equivalent LMF coil on the SFLL is inconsistent
under
Figure4.
Figure different
4.The plate thicknesses.
Therelationship
relationship between
between Therefore,
the the intensity
intensity of thefurther
ofdefect analysis
the defect
LMF and LMF is and
the needed.the magnetizing
magnetizing current curren
under
under different
The defect
different plate
plateLMF thicknesses
BMFL ist. the
thicknesses t. difference between the measuring point magnetic field
when the equivalent LMF coil is energized Bon and powered off Boff. The magnetic field of
The
Thedefect LMF Bresults
simulation MFL is the showdifference
that between the mm,
measuring point magnetic field
the equivalent LMF coil enhances the when t < 1.5
local magnetization theofLMFthe is almostiron
slotted unchanged
plate. The a
when the equivalent LMF coil is energized Bon and powered off Boff . The magnetic field
first, then
magnetization increases rapidly with the increase of magnetization, and finally it gradually
of the equivalentnear LMFthe coilslot is enhanced
enhances the localby a certain ΔH,
magnetization andslotted
of the the corresponding
iron plate. The LMF of
decreases
the slot is after
enhanced reaching
by the
ΔB. maximum
Then the value.
change of
magnetization near the slot is enhanced by a certain ∆H, and the corresponding When
the LMFt > 1.5
of mm,
the slotthe LMFdifferent
under isLMFalmostmag-
con
stant at
netizations first
of the slot iswas and then
simulated
enhanced decreases
by ∆B.as Then
shown slowly with
thebychange
the black the
of the increase
line
LMF of
in Figure the magnetization.
5. The
of the slot underincreasing It can
differentvalue of be
seenLMF
the that ΔB
magnetizations the magnetization
gradually
was simulated effect
decreases
as shown of the
with equivalent
bythe
the increase
black lineLMF of coil magnetizing
in the
Figureon5.theThe SFLL iscurrent.
inconsisten
increasing This
under
value ofdifferent
the LMF ∆B
plate thicknesses.
gradually Therefore,
decreases with further
the analysis
increase
characteristic quantity can be represented by the derivative of the LMF intensity with of the is needed.
magnetizing current.
This characteristic
respect Thetodefect quantity
LMF
the magnetizing BMFLcan be represented
iscurrent
the 𝐵
difference bybetween
as the derivative
shown thethe
by ofred
the LMF
measuring line in intensity
point with
magnetic
Figure 5. Thefield
de-
respect to the magnetizing current 0
BMFL as shownBby the red line in Figure 5.. The
The derivative
when the equivalent
rivative of the LMF intensity LMF
0
coil 𝐵is energized and powered off B
decays rapidly with the increase of the magnetizing
on off magnetic field o
of the LMF
the equivalent intensity
LMFthen Bcoil decays
enhances rapidly with
the local the increase of the magnetizing current
current at first, and MFL slowly decays to 0, magnetization
which explainsof the the slotted
decay iron
trend inplate. The
the latter
at first, and then slowly decays to 0, which explains the decay trend in the latter part
magnetization
part near the slot is enhanced by a certain ΔH, and the corresponding LMF o
of theofcurves
the curves
in Figurein Figure
4. The 4. The increase
increase of the LMFof the LMF
in the in the SFLL-MFL
SFLL-MFL method due method
to the due to
the magnetization
the slot is enhanced
magnetization enhancement
by ΔB.ofThen
enhancement ofthe
the slot thechange
slot is
is called
ofmagnetization
thecalled
the LMF of the
the magnetizationslot under
enhancement
different mag
enhancement
effect in ef-
netizations
fect
this in was simulated as shown by the black line in Figure 5. The increasing value of
this paper.
paper.
the LMF ΔB gradually decreases with the increase of the magnetizing current. This
characteristic
0.35 quantity can be represented by the derivative of the LMF intensity with
(T/A) of LMF intensity BMFL (T/A)

respect to the magnetizing current 𝐵 as shown 0.10 by the red line in Figure 5. The de
0.30
rivative of the LMF intensity 𝐵 decays rapidly with the increase of the magnetizing
0.08 explains the decay trend in the latter
LMF intensity BMFL (T)

current at first, and then slowly decays to 0, which

'

0.25
part of the curves in Figure 4. The increase of the LMF in the SFLL-MFL method due to
LMF intensity Bof 0.06
the 0.20
magnetization enhancement MFLthe slot is called the magnetization enhancement ef-
'
fect in this paper. Derivative of LMF intensity BMFL
ΔB 0.04
0.15
0.35
Derivative

0.10 0.02
0.10
0.30 ΔΗ
0.05 0.00
Derivative of LMF intensity B'MFL

0.08
LMF intensity BMFL (T)

0.25 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Magnetizing current (A)
0.06
0.20 LMF intensity BMFL
Figure 5.5.The
Figure Thechange
change of Derivative
of the slot LMF
the of LMFintensity
intensity
intensity
slot LMF BMFL andBB'MFL
its and
MFL derivative 0
BMFL with𝐵different
its derivative magnetiz-
with different mag-
ΔB 0.04
0.15 currents.
ing currents.
netizing

The magnetic field generated by the equivalent

0.10 0.02
LMF coil produces magnetization
enhancementΔin Η the local area of the iron plate. The relative permeability of the ferromag-
netic0.05 0.00
material will also change according to the B-H curve under different magnetizations.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Magnetizing current (A)

Figure 5. The change of the slot LMF intensity BMFL and its derivative 𝐵 with different mag
netizing currents.
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 The magnetic field generated by the equivalent LMF coil produces magnetization 6 of 14
enhancement in the local area of the iron plate. The relative permeability of the ferro-
magnetic material will also change according to the B-H curve under different magneti-
zations.
In otherIn other words,
words, permeability
permeability perturbations
perturbations are generated
are generated in the in the localized
localized regions regions
of en-
of enhanced magnetization [27]. Under the magnetization of the
hanced magnetization [27]. Under the magnetization of the external magnetic field, external magnetic field,
the
the permeability perturbation area will also cause magnetic refraction
permeability perturbation area will also cause magnetic refraction [28], thereby generat- [28], thereby gen-
erating an additional
ing an additional LMF.LMF.
TheThe enhancement
enhancement of the
of the LMF LMF at the
at the measuring
measuring point point
duedue to
to the
the permeability
permeability perturbation
perturbation is called
is called the the permeability
permeability perturbation
perturbation effect
effect in this
in this paper.
paper.
To
To verify the permeability
permeability perturbation
perturbation effect,
effect, the
the length
length ofof the
the equivalent
equivalent LMF LMF coil
coil
was gradually increased based on the simulation
was gradually increased based on the simulation model shown in model shown in Figure 3. Lengthening
Lengthening
the
the equivalent
equivalent LMF LMF coil
coil will
will make
make the the permeability
permeability perturbation
perturbation area area ofof the
the iron
iron plate
plate
away
away from
from the
the vicinity
vicinity of
of the
the slot. TheThe magnetic
magnetic field
field near
near the
the defect
defect became
became gradually
gradually
uniform,
uniform, thereby
thereby eliminating
eliminating the the influence
influence of the permeability perturbation effect. The The
lengths
lengths of
of the
the equivalent
equivalent LMFLMFcoilscoilswere
were 22 mm,
mm, 44 mm,mm,66 mm,
mm,88 mm, mm,10 10mm,
mm,and and20 20mm,
mm,
respectively.
respectively. The
The simulation
simulation results
results areare shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 6.6. The
The results
results show
show thatthat as
as the
the
length of the
length the equivalent
equivalentLMF LMFcoilcoilincreases,
increases,thethe
variation trend
variation of the
trend of equivalent
the equivalent defect LMF
defect
with the
LMF withmagnetizing current
the magnetizing gradually
current changes
gradually from increasing
changes first and
from increasing then
first and decreasing
then de-
to decreasing
creasing all the time,
to decreasing which
all the time,is which
consistent with the variation
is consistent trend of the
with the variation trendderivative
of the de- of
LMF intensity
rivative of LMFinintensity
Figure 5.in Figure 5.

3.5 l=2mm l=4mm l=6mm

l=8mm l=10mm l=20mm
3.0
LMF intensity BMFL (mT)

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Magnetizing current (A)

Figure 6.
Figure Therelationship
6. The relationship between
between the
the defect
defect LMF
LMF intensity
intensity and
and the
the magnetizing
magnetizing current
current with
with coils
coils
of
of different
different lengths.
lengths.

The result of the 20

The 20 mm
mm longlongcoil
coilisiscompared
comparedwith
withthe
thederivative
derivativeofofLMF
LMFintensity,
intensity,as
shown
as inin
shown Figure
Figure7. 7.ItItcan
canbebefound
foundthat
thatthethechange
changetrend
trend is
is almost
almost the same. AsAs aaresult,
result,
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15
the upward
the upward trend
trend in
in the
the first
first half
half of
of each
each curve
curve in
in Figure
Figure 44 is
is caused
caused by
by the
the permeability
permeability
perturbation effect.
perturbation effect.

0.45 LMF of 20mm long coil 0.10

Derivative of LMF intensity B'MFL (T/A)

0.40 Derivative of LMF intensity B'MFL

LMF intensity BMFL (mT)

0.35 0.08

0.30
0.06
0.25
0.04
0.20

0.15 0.02
0.10
0.00
0.05
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Magnetizing current (A)

Figure
Figure 7.
7. The
The comparison
comparison between the defect LMF
LMF intensity
intensity BMFL
BMFL change
changetrend
trendofof20
20mm
mmlong
longcoil
coil
′
0
andthe
and the derivative
derivative of
of LMF intensity 𝐵
LMF intensity BMFL
MFL with the magnetizing current.

The above simulation results show that the enhancement of the defect LMF in the
SFLL-MFL method is caused by the compounding of the magnetization enhancement
effect and the permeability perturbation effect.
 and the derivative of LMF intensity 𝐵′MFL with the magnetizing current.

The above simulation results show that the enhancement of the

Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 SFLL-MFL method is caused by the compounding of the magnetiza
7 of 14

effect and the permeability perturbation effect.

The above simulation results show that the enhancement of the defect LMF in the
2.3. Lift-Off
SFLL-MFL Tolerance
method is causedMechanism of SFLL-MFL
by the compounding Methodenhancement effect
of the magnetization
and the permeability perturbation effect.
Based on the principle of the SFLL-MFL method, when the thick
2.3. Lift-Off Tolerance Mechanism of SFLL-MFL Method
layer increases from t1 to t2, the lift-off value of the sensor increases, as s
Based on the principle of the SFLL-MFL method, when the thickness of the lift-off
The LMF generated
layer increases from t1 to t2 ,by the permeability
the lift-off value of the sensorperturbation effect
increases, as shown will
in Figure 8. decay
increase of the thickness
The LMF generated like the
by the permeability detection
perturbation effectof
willinternal defects
decay rapidly in the c
with the
increase of the thickness like the detection of internal defects in the conventional MFL
method [27].
method [27].

Figure
Figure 8.8.Schematic
Schematic diagram
diagram of the
of the thickness thickness
variation variation of SFLL.
of SFLL.

However, the distance between the sensor and the lift-off layer does not change.
However,
The signal thebydistance
contributed the LMF ofbetween
the slot does the
notsensor
decreaseand theincrease
with the lift-off
of layer
the doe
thickness of the lift-off layer. Moreover, the depth of the slot is equal to the thickness of
signal contributed by the LMF of the slot does not decrease with th
the lift-off layer, so as the thickness of the lift-off layer increases, the depth of the slot also
thickness of the the
increases. Therefore, lift-off
effect oflayer. Moreover,
increasing thethickness
the lift-off layer depthonofthethe slot is equal t
magnetization
enhancement effect needs further study.
the lift-off layer, so as the thickness of the lift-off layer increases, the de
The characteristic quantity of the magnetization enhancement effect is the derivative of
increases.
the LMF of the Therefore, the effect of
slot with the magnetization. increasing
Therefore, keepingthe
otherlift-off layer
conditions thickness
unchanged,
the relationship
tion enhancement between the LMF
effect intensity
needs and the
further magnetizing current for different
study.
thicknesses of the SFLL was simulated. The thickness of the SFLL was increased from
0.5 mmThe characteristic
to 3.0 mm with an intervalquantity
of 0.5 mm.ofThe
themagnetizing
magnetization enhancement
current was increased from effe
of0.5the
A toLMF of the
15 A with slot with
an interval the
of 0.5 A. Themagnetization.
derivation of the slotTherefore,
LMF with ironkeeping
plates oth
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 0
BMFL of different thicknesses was obtained separately. The simulation results are shown 8 of 15
changed,
in Figure 9.
the relationship between the LMF intensity and the magne
different thicknesses of the SFLL was simulated. The thickness of the SF
from 0.5 mm to 3.0 mm with an interval of 0.5 mm. The magnetizin
creased from 0.5 A to 15 A with an interval of 0.5 A. The derivation of
iron plates 𝐵′MFL of different thicknesses was obtained separately. The
are shown in Figure 9.

Figure9.9.The
Figure Therelationship between
relationship betweenthe derivative of LMF
the derivative of intensity 0
BMFL
LMF intensity 𝐵′MFL
and theand
magnetizing current
the magnetizing
current
with ironwith iron
plates of plates of different
different thicknesses.
thicknesses.

ItItcan
canbebeseen
seenthat
thateach
eachcurve drops
curve quite
drops slowly
quite at first,
slowly thenthen
at first, fallsfalls
rapidly, and and
rapidly, finally
fi-
tends
nally to be flat.
tends Theflat.
to be relationship betweenbetween
The relationship the derivative of LMF intensity
the derivative of LMF and the thickness
intensity and the
thickness of SFLL is observed. Taking t = 1.0 mm and t = 1.5 mm as examples, the deriv-
ative of LMF begins to decrease rapidly when the magnetizing current exceeds the initial
gentle decline stage in the curve of t = 1.5 mm, but the value of the t = 1.5 mm curve is still
greater than that of the t = 1.0 mm curve under the same magnetizing current, as shown
in the yellow area in Figure 9. This shows that when the magnetization exceeds the stage
 Figure 9. The relationship between the derivative of LMF intensity 𝐵′MFL and the magnetizing
current with iron plates of different thicknesses.
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 8 of 14
It can be seen that each curve drops quite slowly at first, then falls rapidly, and fi-
nally tends to be flat. The relationship between the derivative of LMF intensity and the
thickness
of of SFLL is Taking
SFLL is observed. observed. Taking
t = 1.0 mm andt = 1.0
t =mm and as
1.5 mm t =examples,
1.5 mm asthe examples,
derivative theofderiv-
LMF
ative oftoLMF
begins begins
decrease to decrease
rapidly when therapidly when thecurrent
magnetizing magnetizing
exceedscurrent exceeds
the initial gentlethe initial
decline
stage
gentleindecline
the curve stage t =the
of in 1.5curve
mm, butof t the
= 1.5value
mm, of butthethet =value
1.5 mm curve
of the is still
t = 1.5 mmgreater
curve isthan
still
that of the
greater thant =that
1.0 mm curve
of the under
t = 1.0 mmthe same
curve magnetizing
under the samecurrent, as shown
magnetizing in the
current, as yellow
shown
area inyellow
in the Figurearea 9. This shows9.that
in Figure Thiswhen
showsthe magnetization
that exceeds the exceeds
when the magnetization stage where the
the stage
LMF increases linearly with the magnetization, as the thickness of
where the LMF increases linearly with the magnetization, as the thickness of the SFLL the SFLL increases, the
magnetization enhancement effect
increases, the magnetization will increase
enhancement effectaccordingly.
will increase accordingly.
In
In summary,
summary, when when thethe thickness
thickness of of the
the lift-off
lift-off layer
layer increases,
increases, compared
compared with with the
the
conventional
conventionalMFL MFL method,
method, the the
magnetization
magnetization enhancement
enhancement effect in the SFLL-MFL
effect method
in the SFLL-MFL
compensates
method compensatesfor the attenuation of the LMF.
for the attenuation of Therefore, the new method
the LMF. Therefore, the new is tolerant
method to is the
tol-
increase of lift-off value, as shown in Figure 10.
erant to the increase of lift-off value, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Schematic

Figure10. Schematicdiagram
diagramof
ofthe
thelift-off
lift-offtolerance
toleranceof
ofthe
theSFLL-MFL
SFLL-MFLmethod.
method.
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
3. Simulation
3. Simulation
The magnetization enhancement effect and permeability perturbation effect in the
The magnetization enhancement effect and permeability perturbation effect in the
SFLL-MFL
The slottedmethod andlift-off
iron plate the lift-off
layer tolerance
was were
located onanalyzed usingworkpiece.
the steel plate the equivalent
The LMF coil
scanning
SFLL-MFL method and the lift-off tolerance were analyzed using the equivalent LMF coil
model.
path ofNext,
LMF the
wasMFL
0.3 detection
mm above model
the for thelayer.
lift-off steel The
platerelevant
workpiece was usedare
dimensions to verify
shown the
in
model. Next, the MFL detection model for the steel plate workpiece was used to verify
detection
Figure effect of
11 and effect the SFLL-MFL
the specific method. The two-dimensional simulation model shown
the detection of theparameters
SFLL-MFL are shownThe
method. in Table 2. Other technical
two-dimensional information
simulation model
in Figure
about the11 was established
simulation model by
is using the with
consistent COMSOL simulation
Section 2.2. software.
shown in Figure 11 was established by using the COMSOL simulation software.
This model is composed of a steel plate workpiece, a slotted iron plate, and a mag-
netizing coil. The magnetizing coil produces a horizontal magnetization field in the slot-
ted iron plate and the workpiece. There was a groove defect on the steel plate workpiece.

Figure11.
Figure 11. Two-dimensional
Two-dimensionalsimulation
simulationmodel
modelof
ofthe
theSFLL-MFL
SFLL-MFLmethod.
method.

TableThis
2. The parameters
model of the 2D
is composed of simulation model.
a steel plate workpiece, a slotted iron plate, and a magne-
tizing coil. The magnetizing coil produces a horizontal magnetization field in the slotted
Item Parameters
iron plate and the workpiece. There was a groove defect on the steel plate workpiece. The
Magnetization
slotted iron platecoil Number
lift-off layer of turnson
was located N the
= 3000,
steelmagnetization current
plate workpiece. I = 12 A path
The scanning
Steel
of LMF plate
wasworkpiece
0.3 mm aboveMaterial is layer.
the lift-off Q235; The
length = 100 dimensions
relevant mm; plate thickness
are shown= in
10 Figure
mm 11
and the specific
Groove defect parameters are shown
Width = 0.6 mm;in Table
depth2.= 1.0
Other
mmtechnical information about the
simulation
Slotted ironmodel
plate is consistent with
Material is Section 2.2.
Q235; thickness = 1 mm; slot width = 0.6 mm

3.1. The Enhancement of the LMF by the SFLL

First, the detection effect of the three different kinds of lift-off layers of slotted iron
plate, iron plate, and air on the LMF was verified. The LMF distributions of the defect
were simulated under three conditions, respectively. Magnetic induction intensity in the
horizontal direction Bx was extracted along the scanning path, and the background
 Figure 11. Two-dimensional simulation model of the SFLL-MFL method.

Table 2. The parameters of the 2D simulation model.

Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 9 of 14
Item Parameters
Magnetization coil Number of turns N = 3000, magnetization current I = 12 A
Steel plate workpiece Material
Table 2. The parameters of the is Q235;
2D simulation length = 100 mm; plate thickness = 10 mm
model.
Groove defectItem Width = 0.6 mm; depth =Parameters
1.0 mm
Slotted iron plate
Magnetization coil Material
NumberisofQ235;
turns Nthickness = 1 mm; slot
= 3000, magnetization width
current = 0.6
I = 12 A mm
Steel plate workpiece Material is Q235; length = 100 mm; plate thickness = 10 mm
Groove
3.1. defect
The Enhancement of the Widthby
LMF = 0.6
themm;
SFLL depth = 1.0 mm
Slotted iron plate Material is Q235; thickness = 1 mm; slot width = 0.6 mm
First, the detection effect of the three different kinds of lift-off layers of slotted iron
plate,
3.1. Theiron plate, and
Enhancement airLMF
of the on the LMF
by the SFLLwas verified. The LMF distributions of the defect
wereFirst,
simulated under effect
the detection threeof conditions, respectively.
the three different kinds ofMagnetic induction
lift-off layers intensity
of slotted iron in the
horizontal direction B was extracted along the scanning path,
plate, iron plate, and air on the LMF was verified. The LMF distributions of the defect
x and the background
magnetic
were simulatedfieldsunder
of thethreecorresponding three modelsMagnetic
conditions, respectively. withoutinduction
defects were subtracted
intensity in to
the horizontal
obtain direction B
the distribution wasdefect
ofx the extracted
LMF,along the scanning
which is plottedpath, and the
in Figure 12.background
It can be seen that
magnetic
the fields of the
LMF intensity of corresponding
the slotted iron three models
plate without
lift-off defects
layer was 79 were
mT, thesubtracted to lift-off
iron plate
obtain the distribution of the defect LMF, which is plotted in Figure 12. It
layer was 30 mT, and the air was 24 mT. The simulation results verified that the iron platecan be seen that
the LMF intensity of the slotted iron plate lift-off layer was 79 mT, the iron plate lift-off layer
lift-off layer has a certain enhancement effect relative to the air lift-off layer, but is not
was 30 mT, and the air was 24 mT. The simulation results verified that the iron plate lift-off
prominent. When compared with the air lift-off layer, the LMF amplitude Bx with the
layer has a certain enhancement effect relative to the air lift-off layer, but is not prominent.
slotted iron plate
When compared withlift-off
the air layer
lift-offwas
layer,enhanced by 263%.BxThe
the LMF amplitude withenhancement
the slotted iron effect
plate of the
SFLL is remarkable.
lift-off layer was enhanced by 263%. The enhancement effect of the SFLL is remarkable.

Figure 12. Comparison of LMF distribution between slotted iron plate, iron plate, and air lift-off layer.

3.2. Lift-Off Tolerance of the SFLL-MFL Method

The thickness of the lift-off layer t varied from 0.25 mm to 3 mm with an interval of
0.25 mm. The amplitudes of the LMF Bx were plotted in Figure 13. It can be seen that the
Bx of the LMF of the three kinds of lift-off layers are all attenuated with the increase of the
lift-off layer thickness. However, compared with the air lift-off layer, the iron plate lift-off
layer only enhances the LMF when t is less than 1.5 mm. When t is greater than 1.5 mm,
the LMF is weakened instead of enhanced. The Bx of the slotted iron plate lift-off layer is
stronger than that of the iron plate lift-off layer and the air lift-off layer at different t.
The three curves were normalized and the attenuation speeds of the three curves
were observed, as shown in Figure 14. The attenuation percentages of LMF amplitudes
for three kinds of lift-off layers were extracted and the thicknesses of the lift-off layers
ranged from 0.25 mm to 1 mm, 0.25 mm to 2 mm, and 0.25 mm to 3 mm, respectively, as
shown in Table 3. It can be seen that when the lift-off value increases from 0.25 mm to
1 mm, the Bx of both the iron plate lift-off layer and the air lift-off layer are declined by
62.1% and 61.8%, respectively, while that of the slotted iron plate is only declined by 16.9%.
When the t increases to 2 mm, the Bx of both the iron plate and the air lift-off layer have
been attenuated by 89.6% and 81.6%, respectively, while attenuation amplitude with the
 80 Air

LMF amplitude Bx (mT

3.2. Lift-Off Tolerance of the SFLL-MFL Method
70
60The thickness of the lift-off layer t varied from 0.25 mm to 3 mm with an interval of
0.2550mm. The amplitudes of the LMF Bx were plotted in Figure 13. It can be seen that the
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 Bx of40the LMF of the three kinds of lift-off layers are all attenuated with the increase 10 of 14 of the
lift-off
30 layer thickness. However, compared with the air lift-off layer, the iron plate lift-off
layer20 only enhances the LMF when t is less than 1.5 mm. When t is greater than 1.5 mm,
the LMF is weakened instead of enhanced. The Bx of the slotted iron plate lift-off layer is
slotted
10 iron plate has not exceeded 30.2%. Thickened to 3mm, the SFLL-MFL method is
stronger thanlift-off
still relatively
0
that oftolerant.
the iron plate lift-off layer and the air lift-off layer at different t.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
100 Thickness of lift-off layers (mm)iron plate
Slotted
90 Iron plate
Figure 13. The relationship between the Bx and the thickness of the lift-off layer for the slotted iron
80
LMF amplitude Bx (mT) Air
plate, iron plate, and air lift-off layer.
70
60 three curves were normalized and the attenuation speeds of the three curves
The
were 50observed, as shown in Figure 14. The attenuation percentages of LMF amplitudes
40 kinds of lift-off layers were extracted and the thicknesses of the lift-off layers
for three
ranged 30 from 0.25 mm to 1 mm, 0.25 mm to 2 mm, and 0.25 mm to 3 mm, respectively, as
shown 20 in Table 3. It can be seen that when the lift-off value increases from 0.25 mm to 1
mm, 10 the Bx of both the iron plate lift-off layer and the air lift-off layer are declined by
62.1% 0and 61.8%, respectively, while that of the slotted iron plate is only declined by
16.9%. 0.0
When0.5 1.0
the t increases 1.5 to 22.0 mm, 2.5
the Bx3.0
of both the iron plate and the air lift-off layer
Thickness of lift-off layers (mm)
have been attenuated by 89.6% and 81.6%, respectively, while attenuation amplitude
with the
Figure
Figure 13.slotted
13. The iron plate
Therelationship
relationship has the
between
between notBxexceeded
the and the30.2%.
the thickness
Bx and of Thickened
theof
thickness lift-off to for
layer
the lift-off 3mm, thetheSFLL-MFL
the slotted
layer for iron
slotted iron
method
plate, is plate,
plate, iron
iron still
plate,relatively
and
andairair lift-off
lift-off layer.
lift-off tolerant.
layer.

1.0The three curves were normalized and the attenuation speeds of the three curves
Slotted iron plate
were0.9 observed, as shown in Figure 14.
Iron plate The attenuation percentages of LMF amplitudes
Normalized LMF amplitude

for 0.8
three kinds of lift-off layers Airwere extracted and the thicknesses of the lift-off layers
ranged
0.7 from 0.25 mm to 1 mm, 0.25 mm to 2 mm, and 0.25 mm to 3 mm, respectively, as
shown
0.6 in Table 3. It can be seen that when the lift-off value increases from 0.25 mm to 1
mm, 0.5the Bx of both the iron plate lift-off layer and the air lift-off layer are declined by
62.1%
0.4 and 61.8%, respectively, while that of the slotted iron plate is only declined by
16.9%.
0.3 When the t increases to 2 mm, the Bx of both the iron plate and the air lift-off layer
have0.2 been attenuated by 89.6% and 81.6%, respectively, while attenuation amplitude
with0.1the slotted iron plate has not exceeded 30.2%. Thickened to 3mm, the SFLL-MFL
method
0.0 is still relatively lift-off tolerant.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
1.0 Thickness of lift-off layers (mm)iron plate
Slotted
Iron plateLMF Bx and the thickness of the lift-off layer for the
0.914. Relationship between the normalized
Figure
Normalized LMF amplitude

Air layer.
0.8 iron plate, iron plate, and air lift-off
slotted
0.7
Table0.63. Comparison of attenuation speed with slotted iron plate, iron plate, and air lift-off layer
under0.5different thickness variation ranges.
0.4 Layer Thickness Range
Lift-Off Slotted Iron Plate Iron Plate Air
0.3
0.25 mm–1 mm 16.9% 62.1% 61.8%
0.2mm–2 mm
0.25 30.2% 89.6% 81.6%
0.1mm–3 mm
0.25 39.3% 96.3% 88.5%
0.0
4. Experimental
0.0 0.5 Verification
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
In order toThickness
verify theoffeasibility
lift-off layers
of (mm)
the SFLL-MFL method, an experimental platform
was built as shown in Figure 15. The experimental sample was a Q235 steel plate with
a length of 300 mm, a width of 40 mm, and a thickness of 10 mm. An artificial defect of
the transverse rectangular groove was processed by electrical discharge machining on the
upper surface of the steel plate sample. The groove defect length was 40 mm, the width
was 0.6 mm, and the depth was 1 mm. The DC magnetizing coil with 3000 turns was
 4. Experimental Verification
In order to verify the feasibility of the SFLL-MFL method, an experimental platform
was built as shown in Figure 15. The experimental sample was a Q235 steel plate with a
length of 300 mm, a width of 40 mm, and a thickness of 10 mm. An artificial defect of the
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 transverse rectangular groove was processed by electrical discharge machining 11 onofthe
14
upper surface of the steel plate sample. The groove defect length was 40 mm, the width
was 0.6 mm, and the depth was 1 mm. The DC magnetizing coil with 3000 turns was
poweredby
powered byaaDC DCmagnetizing
magnetizingpower powersource.
source.The
Thesteel
steelplate
platesample
samplewaswaslongitudinally
longitudinally
magnetizedwith
magnetized withaamagnetizing
magnetizingcurrent
current ofof
1010
A.A.
TheThe Hall
Hall element
element HG-0811
HG-0811 waswas adopted
adopted as
as the
the magnetic
magnetic sensor,
sensor, andsignal
and the the signal was collected
was collected and displayed
and displayed by the oscilloscope
by the oscilloscope directly.
directly.
To ensureTo theensure the of
accuracy accuracy
the slottedof the
ironslotted iron copper
plate and plate and copper
plate plate
lift-off layerlift-off layer
thickness,
thickness,
feeler gauges feeler gauges
were used aswere
theused aslayer
lift-off the lift-off
for thelayer for the experiments.
experiments. The thickness Theofthickness
the two
of theoftwo
kinds kinds
lift-off of lift-off
layers was set layers
to 1.5was
mm. setThe
to 1.5
slotmm.
on theThe slot
iron on the
plate wasiron plate was
processed pro-
by wire
cutting,
cessed byand the cutting,
wire slot widthandwasthe0.6
slotmm.
width was 0.6 mm.

Figure 15.Schematic
Figure15. Schematicof
ofthe
theexperimental
experimentalsetup
setupfor
forSFLL-MFL
SFLL-MFLdetection.
detection.

The
TheHall
Hallelement
elementwas wasfixed
fixedononthetheslotted
slottediron
ironplate
plateandandaligned
alignedwithwiththe
thecenterline
centerline
of
of the slot. The slotted iron plate, which was close to the steel plate sample, scannedthe
the slot. The slotted iron plate, which was close to the steel plate sample, scanned the
defect
defecton onthethesteel plate
steel platesample
sampleseveral
severaltimes. Stable
times. MFLMFL
Stable signal waveforms
signal were obtained
waveforms were ob-
on the oscilloscope.
tained Then the
on the oscilloscope. Hallthe
Then element was fixed
Hall element wason fixed
the copper
on theplate andplate
copper scanned
and
the defects in the same way. The signal waveforms of the copper
scanned the defects in the same way. The signal waveforms of the copper plate were plate were obtained on
the oscilloscope. The experimental results are shown in Figure 16.
obtained on the oscilloscope. The experimental results are shown in Figure 16. It can beIt can be seen that the
signal amplitude
seen that the signal of the copper plate
amplitude of thelift-off
copperlayer
plateislift-off
29 mV,layer
whileis the signal
29 mV, amplitude
while of
the signal
the
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW slotted iron plate lift-off layer is 98 mV, which is about 3.4 times that of the
amplitude of the slotted iron plate lift-off layer is 98 mV, which is about 3.4 times that of 12 of 15 copper
plate lift-offplate
the copper layer.lift-off
The enhancement effect of the
layer. The enhancement MFLofsignal
effect the MFLin the SFLL-MFL
signal method
in the SFLL-MFL
ismethod
obvious. is obvious.

16. MFL
Figure 16.
Figure MFLsignal
signalinin
lift-off layer
lift-off of copper
layer plateplate
of copper and slotted iron plate.
and slotted iron plate.

Then, the effect of the slotted iron plate and the copper plate on the intensity of the
Then, the effect of the slotted iron plate and the copper plate on the intensity of the
LMF was verified under different lift-off layer thicknesses. For verification, 0.2 mm, 0.4 mm,
LMF was verified under different lift-off layer thicknesses. For verification, 0.2 mm, 0.4
mm, 0.6 mm, 0.8 mm, 1.0 mm, 1.5 mm, 2.0 mm, 2.5 mm, and 3.0 mm thick copper plate
lift-off layers and slot iron plate lift-off layers were used. The amplitudes of the MFL
signals under the above-mentioned experimental conditions are obtained, respectively.
 Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 12 of 14

0.6 mm, 0.8 mm, 1.0 mm, 1.5 mm, 2.0 mm, 2.5 mm, and 3.0 mm thick copper plate lift-off
layers and slot iron plate lift-off layers were used. The amplitudes of the MFL signals under 13 of 15
Sensors 2022, 22, x FOR PEER REVIEW
the above-mentioned experimental conditions are obtained, respectively. The average value
was obtained by scanning multiple times, as plotted in Figure 17.

140
Slotted iron plate
120 Copper plate
Signal amplitude (mV)

100
80
60
40
20

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Thickness of lift-off layer (mm)
Figure 17.
Figure Relationship between
17. Relationship betweenthe
thesignal
signalamplitude
amplitudevalue
valueof of
two kinds
two of of
kinds lift-off layers
lift-off andand their
layers
their thickness.
thickness.
The experimental results show that with the increase of the thickness of the lift-off
layer,Then, the magnetization
the amplitudes of the MFLcurrent
signals Iofvaried
the twofromkinds6 of
A lift-off
to 14 A withboth
layers an decrease
interval of 2 A,
and the thickness
gradually, of the slotted
but the amplitude ironsignals
of the MFL plate and
of thecopper
slotted plate changed
iron plate from
is higher than0.25
thatmm to 3
mm.
of the copper plate. When the lift-off layer thickness is 0.2 mm, the signal amplitude of stands
The attenuation speed of two lift-off layers was compared in Table 4. What
out in this iron
the slotted tableplate
is the slow
is 1.32 attenuation
times that of thespeed
copperwith
plate.theAsslotted iron plate
the thickness compared
increases, the with
magnification
the iron platewith the slotted
or copper iron
plate. plate gradually
When increases tocurrent
the magnetization 5.6 times. The enhancement
I increased from 6 A to 14
effect
A, theisattenuation
remarkable. speed with the copper plate was more than 80% and the attenuation
In addition,
speed of the copper the attenuation
plate wasspeed of the slotted
practically constantironwith
platethe
is also slower
change ofthan that of
magnetizing cur-
the copper plate. In the process of increasing the lift-off layer thickness from 0.2 mm to
rent. While the attenuation speed with the slotted iron plate varied from 41.94% to 52.6%,
3 mm, the signal amplitude with the copper plate is attenuated by 87%, while the signal
which is much slower than that of the copper plate. Meanwhile, what can be seen is the
amplitude of the slotted iron plate is only attenuated by 46%.
growth of the attenuation
Compared speed with
with the simulation resultstheshown
increase of the 13,
in Figure magnetization
the copper plate current.
in theAccord-
ing to Section
experiment 2.2, the magnetization
is equivalent to the air lift-offenhancement effect decays
layer in the simulation. withbethe
It should increase
noted that of the
magnetizing
the vertical axis current.
label ofTherefore,
simulations with
is LMFthe growth
amplitude of Bthe
x magnetization
and the vertical current,
axis label the mag-
of
experiments is the signal amplitude of the Hall sensor. The values
netization enhancement effect decays and the attenuation speed with the slotted iron of the simulation and
experiment
plate results
increases. cannot
The be compared
experimental directly.
results areEven so, we can
consistent withfindthe
thatprevious
the SFLL mechanism
and
non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer have the same attenuation trend. For the attenuation speed
analysis.
of the non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer, the simulation result is 88.5% and the experiment
result is 87%. There is little difference between the two results. For the attenuation speed
Table 4. Comparison of amplitudes of the MFL signals and attenuation speed of slotted iron plate
of SFLL, the simulation result is 39.3% and the experiment result is 46%. The two results
and air lift-off layer under different magnetization current I when the thickness of lift-off layer
are not completely consistent. This is mainly because there is a difference in the magnetic
varies from 0.25 mm to 3 mm.
properties between the experimental steel plate sample and the model in the simulation
software. In addition,Airthe position of the sensor on the lift-off layer may have a certain
SFLL
Magnetization
error. However, the numerical difference does not affect the laws and conclusions.
0.2 mm 3 mm Attenuation 0.2 mm 3 mm Attenuation
Current I (A)
Then, the magnetization current I varied from 6 A to 14 A with an interval of 2 A, and
the thickness of the(mT) (mT)
slotted iron Speed plate changed
plate and copper (mT)from 0.25(mT)
mm to 3Speed
mm.
6The attenuation speed 63.2of two lift-off
11.58 layers81.68% 90.22 52.38
was compared in Table 4. What stands out 41.94%
in
8this table is the slow98.63
attenuation15.93
speed with83.85% 122.8compared
the slotted iron plate 66.79
with the45.61%
iron
plate or copper plate.
10 When the
132.2 magnetization
19.31 current I increased
85.39% 150.5 from 75.96
6 A to 14 A, the
49.53%
attenuation
12 speed with
155.5the copper
22.2 plate was more
85.72% than 80% and the
174.6 attenuation
84.73 speed of
51.47%
the copper plate was practically constant with the change of magnetizing current. While
14 168.6 25.29 85.00% 193.3 91.62
the attenuation speed with the slotted iron plate varied from 41.94% to 52.6%, which is
52.60%

Therefore, it has been verified that compared with the non-ferromagnetic lift-off
layer, the SFLL is more tolerant to the change of the lift-off value.
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 13 of 14

much slower than that of the copper plate. Meanwhile, what can be seen is the growth
of the attenuation speed with the increase of the magnetization current. According to
Section 2.2, the magnetization enhancement effect decays with the increase of the magnetiz-
ing current. Therefore, with the growth of the magnetization current, the magnetization
enhancement effect decays and the attenuation speed with the slotted iron plate increases.
The experimental results are consistent with the previous mechanism analysis.

Table 4. Comparison of amplitudes of the MFL signals and attenuation speed of slotted iron plate
and air lift-off layer under different magnetization current I when the thickness of lift-off layer varies
from 0.25 mm to 3 mm.

Air SFLL
Magnetization
Current I (A) 0.2 mm 3 mm Attenuation 0.2 mm 3 mm Attenuation
(mT) (mT) Speed (mT) (mT) Speed
6 63.2 11.58 81.68% 90.22 52.38 41.94%
8 98.63 15.93 83.85% 122.8 66.79 45.61%
10 132.2 19.31 85.39% 150.5 75.96 49.53%
12 155.5 22.2 85.72% 174.6 84.73 51.47%
14 168.6 25.29 85.00% 193.3 91.62 52.60%

Therefore, it has been verified that compared with the non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer,
the SFLL is more tolerant to the change of the lift-off value.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, an MFL detection method based on the slotted ferromagnetic lift-off
layer is introduced. Compared with the conventional non-ferromagnetic lift-off layer, the
SFLL-MFL method can obtain a stronger MFL signal with a large-thickness lift-off layer. In
the experiment with a 3 mm thick lift-off layer, the signal amplitude of the new method is
5.6 times that of the conventional MFL method. The enhancement effect of the new method
comes from the magnetization enhancement effect and the permeability perturbation effect.
The magnetization enhancement effect makes the new method more tolerant to the change
in the lift-off layer thickness. In the experiment of increasing the lift-off layer thickness from
0.2 mm to 3 mm, the signal amplitude of the copper plate is attenuated by 87%, while that
of the slotted iron plate is only attenuated by 46%. Whether the lift-off layer is thickened or
the lift-off layer is worn and thinned during working, a stronger and more stable signal can
be obtained.
The implementation of the SFLL-MFL method is simple and effective, which has
good engineering application potential for MFL detection of contactable ferromagnetic
workpieces. In the next work, we are going to make the SFLL with flexible magnetic
material or magnetic fluid, so as to adapt to the MFL detection of complex parts, which is
not accessible to the probe, and precision parts that are forbidden to be contacted by the
solid probe.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.T.; methodology, J.T. and R.W.; software, G.Q. and Y.H.;
validation, J.T. and R.W.; writing—original draft preparation, J.T.; writing—review and editing, J.T.,
R.W., and G.Q.; visualization, J.T. and Y.H.; supervision, Y.K.; project administration, Y.K.; funding
acquisition, Y.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC),
grant number 51875226.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sensors 2022, 22, 3587 14 of 14

References
1. Jarvis, R.; Cawley, P.; Nagy, P.B. Current Deflection NDE for the Inspection and Monitoring of Pipes. NDT E Int. 2016, 81, 46–59.
[CrossRef]
2. Nestleroth, J.B.; Davis, R.J. Application of Eddy Currents Induced by Permanent Magnets for Pipeline Inspection. NDT E Int.
2007, 40, 77–84. [CrossRef]
3. Zhou, Y.-L.; Qian, X.; Birnie, A.; Zhao, X.-L. A Reference Free Ultrasonic Phased Array to Identify Surface Cracks in Welded Steel
Pipes Based on Transmissibility. Int. J. Press. Vessel. Pip. 2018, 168, 66–78. [CrossRef]
4. Zeng, W.; Yao, Y. Numerical Simulation of Laser-Generated Ultrasonic Waves for Detection Surface Defect on a Cylinder Pipe.
Optik 2020, 212, 164650. [CrossRef]
5. Tout, K.; Meguenani, A.; Urban, J.P.; Cudel, C. Automated Vision System for Magnetic Particle Inspection of Crankshafts Using
Convolutional Neural Networks. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2021, 112, 3307–3326. [CrossRef]
6. Xin, D.; Jinqiu, M.; Bo, Y.; Wen, H.; Shigang, W. An Automatic Magnetic Particle Inspection System for Detecting Defects in
Mooring Chains. Insight 2013, 55, 29–34. [CrossRef]
7. Wang, R.; Kang, Y.; Tang, J.; Feng, B.; Deng, Y. A Novel Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing Method Based on AC and DC Composite
Magnetization. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 2020, 39, 84. [CrossRef]
8. Wu, J.; Wu, W.; Li, E.; Kang, Y. Magnetic Flux Leakage Course of Inner Defects and Its Detectable Depth. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2021,
34, 63. [CrossRef]
9. Ege, Y.; Coramik, M. A New Measurement System Using Magnetic Flux Leakage Method in Pipeline Inspection. Measurement
2018, 123, 163–174. [CrossRef]
10. Shi, Y.; Zhang, C.; Li, R.; Cai, M.; Jia, G. Theory and Application of Magnetic Flux Leakage Pipeline Detection. Sensors 2015, 15,
31036–31055. [CrossRef]
11. Ye, C.; Huang, Y.; Udpa, L.; Udpa, S.S. Novel Rotating Current Probe With GMR Array Sensors for Steam Generate Tube
Inspection. IEEE Sens. J. 2016, 16, 4995–5002. [CrossRef]
12. Feng, Q.; Li, R.; Nie, B.; Liu, S.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, H. Literature Review: Theory and Application of In-Line Inspection Technologies
for Oil and Gas Pipeline Girth Weld Defection. Sensors 2016, 17, 50. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Ni, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Xin, R. Magnetic Flux Detection and Identification of Bridge Cable Metal Area Loss Damage. Measurement 2021,
167, 108443. [CrossRef]
14. Wang, X.; Wu, X.; Xu, J.; Ba, H. Study on the Lift-off Effect on MFL Signals with Magnetic Circuit Model and 3D FEM. Insight
2012, 54, 505–510. [CrossRef]
15. Lee, J.; Jun, J.; Kim, J.; Le, M. Jinyi Lee; Jongwoo Jun; Jungmin Kim; Minhhuy Le Electromagnetic Nondestructive Testing at High
Lift-off Using a Magnetic Image Conduit. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2013, 27, 1287–1293. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, C.; Su, W.; Hu, Z.; Pu, J.; Guan, M.; Peng, B.; Li, L.; Ren, W.; Zhou, Z.; Jiang, Z.; et al. Highly Sensitive Magnetic Sensor
Based on Anisotropic Magnetoresistance Effect. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2018, 54, 1–3. [CrossRef]
17. Singh, W.S.; Rao, B.P.C.; Mukhopadhyay, C.K.; Jayakumar, T. Finite Element Model-Based Approach for Magnetic Flux Leakage
Testing of Steel Plates Using 2D Tandem GMR Array Sensors. Insight 2014, 56, 683–690. [CrossRef]
18. Mohd Noor Sam, M.A.I.; Jin, Z.; Oogane, M.; Ando, Y. Investigation of a Magnetic Tunnel Junction Based Sensor for the Detection
of Defects in Reinforced Concrete at High Lift-Off. Sensors 2019, 19, 4718. [CrossRef]
19. Sun, Y.; Liu, S.; Jiang, X.; He, L.; Gu, M.; Liu, C.; Kang, Y.; Luo, X.; Xu, J. A Novel Electromagnetic Testing Method Based on the
Magnetic Field Interaction. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2019, 55, 1–12. [CrossRef]
20. Wang, R.; Deng, Z.; Liu, R.; Kang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Tang, J. A Large Lift-off Nondestructive Testing Method Based on the Interaction
between AC Magnetic Field and MFL Field. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Workshop on Electromagnetic Nondestructive
Evaluation, ENDE 2018, Downtown Detroit, MI, USA, 9–13 September 2018; IOS Press: Detroit, MI, USA, 2019; Volume 44,
pp. 44–49. [CrossRef]
21. Lee, J.Y.; Seo, D.W.; Shoji, T. Numerical Consideration of Magnetic Camera for Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation. KEM
2004, 270–273, 630–635. [CrossRef]
22. Wu, J.; Fang, H.; Li, L.; Wang, J.; Huang, X.; Kang, Y.; Sun, Y.; Tang, C. A Lift-Off-Tolerant Magnetic Flux Leakage Testing Method
for Drill Pipes at Wellhead. Sensors 2017, 17, 201. [CrossRef]
23. Sun, Y.; Kang, Y. A New MFL Principle and Method Based on Near-Zero Background Magnetic Field. NDT E Int. 2010, 43,
348–353. [CrossRef]
24. Yilai, M.; Li, L.; Kaiwen, J.; Xulin, Z. The Application of Magnetic Shielding Effect in Drill Pipe Magnetic Leakage Flux Testing. In
Proceedings of the 2013 Fifth International Conference on Measuring Technology and Mechatronics Automation, Hong Kong,
China, 16–17 January 2013; pp. 1135–1138. [CrossRef]
25. Wu, J.; Fang, H.; Huang, X.; Xia, H.; Kang, Y.; Tang, C. An Online MFL Sensing Method for Steel Pipe Based on the Magnetic
Guiding Effect. Sensors 2017, 17, 2911. [CrossRef]
26. Tang, J.; Wang, R.; Liu, B.; Kang, Y. A Novel Magnetic Flux Leakage Method Based on the Ferromagnetic Lift-off Layer with
through Groove. Sens. Actuators A-Phys. 2021, 332, 113091. [CrossRef]
27. Deng, Z.; Sun, Y.; Kang, Y.; Song, K.; Wang, R. A Permeability-Measuring Magnetic Flux Leakage Method for Inner Surface Crack
in Thick-Walled Steel Pipe. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 2017, 36, 68. [CrossRef]
28. Sun, Y.; Kang, Y. Magnetic Compression Effect in Present MFL Testing Sensor. Sens. Actuators A-Phys. 2010, 160, 54–59. [CrossRef]