IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 46, NO.

11, NOVEMBER 2010 3885

Impedance Calculation of a Bobbin Coil in a Conductive Tube

With Eccentric Walls
Anastassios Skarlatos1 and Theodoros Theodoulidis2
Centre de Saclay, CEA, LIST, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex, France
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Western Macedonia, Bakola & Sialvera, 50100 Kozani, Greece

The complex impedance of an air-cored coil in a conductive tube with eccentric inner and outer cylindrical surfaces is calculated. The
analytic expressions for the induced fields and the impedance variation due to the eddy-current flow inside the tube wall are derived using
a second-order potential approach. The addition theorem of Bessel functions is employed to perform the transition between the local
coordinate systems that conform to the boundaries of the structure. Although the model can be used for any coil shape and orientation,
we focus our study on the configuration of a bobbin coil with axis parallel to the axes of the tube surfaces, but not necessarily coinciding
with either of them. The results of the presented analysis are verified by a finite-element-method (FEM) solution.
Index Terms—Eddy currents, impedance calculation, nondestructive evaluation, tube testing.

I. INTRODUCTION
XISTING semianalytical models for the simulation of
E eddy-current nondestructive evaluation (NDE) of con-
ductive tubes are restricted to cylindrical tubes with coaxial
internal and external interfaces. Deviations from this geometry
in the form of interface eccentricity have not been studied
so far, although they can be of practical interest, e.g., when
construction imperfections have to be taken into account. Tube
configurations with eccentric walls can also be considered
to model a special case of nonuniform wall thinning in tube
inspection. The straightforward extension of such a model to
eccentric multilayered structures can be of considerable interest
for applications involving tubes with coatings or casings in
wells when the external layers present a relative drift with
respect to the embedded tube. Even if such geometries can be
treated by means of fully numerical tools, like for example the
finite-element method (FEM), they have the disadvantage of a
raised computational effort.
Eccentric multilayered cylindrical structures have been ex-
haustively studied in high-frequency applications. The plane
wave scattering from a dielectric cylinder with an eccentric di-
electric enclosure was treated by Uzunoglu and Fikioris [1]. The
more general problem of scattering from an eccentric multilay-
ered circular dielectric cylinder was tackled by Kishk et al. [2].
Stratigaki et al. [3] considered the different senario of a dielec-
tric host cylinder embedding multiple separate cylindrical di-
electric inclusions, while in [4] an extension of this problem
by considering inclusions that are also eccentrically stratified
is studied. Roumeliotis et al. [5] studied the scattering from an
eccentrically coated metallic cylinder. Similar efforts were also
reported in the literature [6], [7]. Even if conductivity effects can
also be taken into account in most of the above formulations (by
considering lossy dielectrics) the solution is merely focused on
Manuscript received November 27, 2009; revised March 18, 2010; accepted
July 28, 2010. Date of publication August 09, 2010; date of current version Oc-
tober 20, 2010. Corresponding author: A. Skarlatos (e-mail: anastasios.skarlatos
@cea.fr).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TMAG.2010.2064331
0018-9464/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE
the scattering effect, the eddy-current problem not being explic-
itly discussed. Furthermore, the field excitation takes the form
of impinging plane waves and has hence different characteristics
than those of the usual excitations utilized in NDE applications.
The analytical formulation of the eddy-current problem in
concentric tubes excited by a coaxial air-cored bobbin coil was
studied by Dodd et al. [8]. The symmetry of this problem al-
lows its treatment by means of a scalar potential (or a single
component of magnetic vector potential). Arbitrary 3-D excita-
tions in problems possessing cylindrical symmetry, however, re-
sult in coupling between transverse electric and transverse
magnetic solutions, which inhibits the use of a scalar
potential formulation. The problem can be tackled by treating
the axial components of the electric and the magnetic field si-
multaneously by means of a dyadic formalism [9], [10]. Fol-
lowing this approach Lovell and Chew analyzed the effect of
tool eccentricity in inductive well-logging [11]. An alternative
approach was followed by Theodoulidis [12], where the wobble
effect of bobbin coils in eddy-current tube testing is analyzed
by introducing a second-order potential which is similar to the
Debye potentials used in [4]. Using the same approach, Burke
and Theodoulidis [13] treated the more elaborate problem of
an horizontal coil in a conductive borehole. Their solution for
the eddy-current field in the undamaged tube has been used in
conjuction with the boundary-element method for the efficient
treatment of cracks in cylindrical tubes [14]. Appropriate ex-
tensions of the second-order potential approach have also made
feasible the analytical treatment of cylindrical coils with arbi-
trary orientation above conducting plates [15], [16], problems
of increased practical interest. This method can also be applied
to tackle finite length cylindrical structures like that of a coil
near the opening of a borehole [17] and the similar problem of
a coil above a right-angled conductive wedge [18].
This work deals with the semianalytic solution of the eddy-
current problem in an eccentric, conductive, nonmagnetic tube,
following the second-order potential approach. By “eccentric
tube” we hereafter refer to a tube with eccentric inner and outer
cylindrical surfaces. Eddy currents in the tube are excited by an
air-cored bobbin coil whose axis is parallel to the tube axis, and
which is allowed to be also eccentric with respect to the tube
surfaces. The presented analysis can be considered as a gener-
alization of the simpler case of the concentric tube eddy-current
3886 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 46, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010

The asymmetry of the structure gives rise to a three-com-

ponent magnetic field, thus a second order potential ansatz is
adopted [12], [17]. According to the latter, the magnetic flux
density can be written as

(1)

where is a second-order vector potential given by

(2)

and are scalar potential terms which stand for the

and solutions, respectively. Both potentials satisfy the
Helmholtz equation
Fig. 1. Problem configuration: bobbin coil in an eccentric tube. For clarity, the
coil is shown to be coaxial with the inner surface of the tube. Coils with offset (3)
from the main axis are also taken into account.

with . For the relatively low frequencies

inspection. The solution to the latter can easily be deduced by
the more general expressions presented herein by setting van-
ishing eccentricity.
The paper is organized as follows. The mathematical formu-
lation of the problem is presented in the first section. The po-
tential solution in the different regions of the solution domain is
expressed in terms of Fourier series and integrals of the eigen-
functions, with expansion coefficients that are determined by
imposing the appropriate boundary conditions across the struc-
ture interfaces. The excitation term is treated in a separate para-
graph. The part of the theory is concluded with the numerical
evaluation of the expansion coefficients. The results of the pro-
posed formulation are then discussed in the following section
where verification of the model is done by comparing results to
results from FEM.
II. MATHEMATICAL TREATMENT OF THE BOUNDARY
VALUE PROBLEM
A. Potential Formulation
Let us consider an infinitely long tube whose outer cylindrical
surface is offset with respect to the inner one by a distance as
shown in Fig. 1. The radii of the inner and outer surfaces are
and respectivelly, with . The tube is assumed to
be conductive and nonmagnetic, and the embedding medium is
considered—without loss of generality—to be air. Let denote
the conductivity of the tube, whereas stand for the per-
mitivity and the permeability of the medium, which in this case
are equal with their respective values in free space (nonmagnetic
conductor). The structure is excited by an air-cored cylindrical
coil located in the interior of the tube with its axis parallel to the
axes of the tube interfaces but it does not necessarily coincide
with either of them. Two local cylindrical coordinate systems
can be defined, with -axes coinciding with the axes of each
tube interface. In the rest of this paper the unprimed coordinates
will refer to the coordinate system defined by the inner interface,
whereas the primed ones will correspond to the local coordinate
system related to the external interface (cf. Fig. 1). The subse-
quent analysis will be restricted to the time-harmonic regime,
i.e., the time convention will be followed throughout this
paper.
(up to some MHz) which are used in eddy-current inspection,
the magneto-quasistatic approximation can be applied, which
gives . From (1) and (2), it follows that
(4)
In the nonconductive regions the above equation reduces to
(5)
where satisfies the Laplace equation
(6)
The potential in the interior of the tube can be written as a
sum of two terms: one for the field produced by the coil in the
absence of the tube, and one standing for the field perturbation
introduced by the latter, namely
(7)
where stand for the coil (source) and the eddy-current-
related term, respectively, and denotes the total potential. The
potential expressions in (7) depend upon the relative position of
the observation point with respect to the coil. For the subse-
quent analysis only the field solution in the vicinity of the inner
boundary is pertinent. It is thus assumed that ,
being the radius of the narrowest fictitious cylindrical surface
which encircles the coil without intersecting it. The modal ex-
pansion for the potential terms in (7) becomes then
(8)
(9)
where and are the modified Bessel functions. The coeffi-
cient is the expansion coefficient for the potential produced
by the coil in the absence of the tube, and it therefore depends
only upon the coil geometry. Its calculation will be considered
in the next section.
SKARLATOS AND THEODOULIDIS: IMPEDANCE CALCULATION OF A BOBBIN COIL IN A CONDUCTIVE TUBE 3887

The potential expressions inside the tube wall ( and The boundary conditions on the outer interface ,
) read read

(19)

for ,
(10)
(20)

for , and
(11)

where . The solution in the exterior of the tube (21)

reads
for .
Since and are expressed in the unprimed coordinate
(12) system, they have to be first converted to the primed one. This
transition can be done using Graf’s addition theorem for Bessel
functions, which for the coordinate systems of Fig. 1 reads [19]
We recall here that the position vectors correspond to the
two local coordinates systems depicted in Fig. 1. The potentials
(22)
in the interior region and the tube wall are expressed in terms of
the unprimed coordinate system of the inner interface, whereas
the primed coordinates are used for the potential expression in (23)
the external region. The above choice for the coordinate system
is made in order that at least one of the tube boundaries conforms
with the -coordinate surface in each case. Substituting in the expressions (10) and (11) and using again
The coefficients , , , , , and can be de- the orthogonality of the exponential functions, the continuity
termined by imposing the boundary conditions on the two inter- relations (19)–(21) give after some manipulations
faces of the tube, namely the continuity of the normal magnetic
flux component and the continuity of the tangential magnetic
field components. Hence, the boundary conditions for the inner
surface yield

(13)

for , (24)
(14)

for , and

(15)

for . Substituting the potential expressions (8)–(11) and

taking the orthogonality of the exponential functions with (25)
imaginary arguments into account, the above continuity rela-
tions lead to the following equations:

(26)

(16)
B. Calculation of the Excitation Term: Coil in Free Space
The expression for the excitation term of an air-cored bobbin
coil is derived by the integral representation of the azimuthal
component of the magnetic vector potential produced in free-
space [12]
(17)
(27)
(18)
3888 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 46, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010

it turns out that

(32)

In this work, we focus on the bobbin coil. However, any other

coil shape or orientation can be modeled as long as the excitation
term can be computed. Another coil excitation of
interest in eddy-current tube testing is the horizontal coil, i.e.,
a pancake type coil with axis that is perpendicular to the inner
tube surface. For the excitation term of the horizontal coil the
Fig. 2. Coordinate transformations for the shifted coil in free space. A denotes reader is referred to [13].
the center of the coil and O is the origin of the unprimed coordinate system.
C. Solution of the System of Equations: Evaluation of the
where Expansion Coefficients
In order to solve numerically the system of equations
(28) (16)–(18) and (24)–(26), the infinite sum of the angular depen-
dence expansion is truncated up to a maximum order.
The larger the tube eccentricity or the coil offset the larger this
and the position vector being defined with respect to the number, see discussion in Section IV. The above equations can
center of the coil (cf. Fig. 2). In (28), stand for the inner be written in a more systematical way using matrix notations.
and outer radii of the coil, is its height, and denotes the wire Setting
turns. The corresponding expression for is

and
(29)

Applying the addition theorem to the triangle OAB (cf. Fig. 2),
the Bessel function can be written in analogy with
(23)

(30)
where and have been exchanged with and , respectively,
and is the angle between and . Substituting (30) into
(29) and comparing it with the system can be written in the form of (33) at the bottom of
the page.
Notice that for , i.e., for tube without eccentricity, only
the terms of the , survive, and the matrices
reduce to the unit matrix. The system (33) reduces then to the
(31) system of equations with noncoupled modes of a normal tube
with coaxial surfaces. Since more than half of the submatrices

(33)
SKARLATOS AND THEODOULIDIS: IMPEDANCE CALCULATION OF A BOBBIN COIL IN A CONDUCTIVE TUBE
in (33) are diagonal or zero, the system can be solved very ef-
ficiently by applying a variation of the Gauss elimination. The
inversion of (33) is examined in more detail in the Appendix.
III. CALCULATION OF THE COIL IMPEDANCE
Having determined the expansion coefficients, the coil
impedance can be easily obtained following the procedure of
[12]. The total impedance can be written as the sum of the coil
impedance in free space plus its variation due to the presence
of the tube, namely
(34)
where
(35)
The impedance variation can be obtained applying the reci-
procity theorem
(36)
where the integration extends over the inner surface of the tube
. , denote the electric field and the magnetic flux den-
sity in the absence of the tube, whereas , denote the corre-
sponding quantities when the tube is present. This equation has
been shown to take the following form [12]:
(37)
which in turn reduces to the following form upon substituting (8)
and (9) and applying Parseval’s theorem for Fourier transform
and Fourier series
(38)
IV. RESULTS
In this section, first we verify the theoretical results by
comparing them to numerical ones derived from the 3-D FEM
package Comsol 3.3. For the evaluation of (38), both the in-
tegration range and the summation limit need to be truncated
to suitable numbers and . In addition, the
maximum number of terms in the summation of the addition
theorem needs to be established. In [13], automatic
integration routines were used for the integration and hence
did not need to be established. A thorough study on
and was done in [20]. We followed the latter
and used a Nyquist-type criterion for Fourier transforms to
decide upon . Integration was done by trapezoidal rule.
Regarding and , these are greater for larger coil
3889
offsets and tube eccentricities. For a typical bobbin coil, the
coil offset cannot be large and, moreover, eddy-current testing
is typically applied to thin-wall tubes, i.e., tubes with a wall
thickness much smaller that the average tube radius. Thus,
appropriate values for and were found to be small
and in all cases they were both set to 5. Note that
for a well-defined linear system. It is interesting to note that the
number defines the size of the matrix that needs to be
inverted. This number is , so in our case we
solve 30 30 systems for each in the integral calculation.
The configuration studied is shown in Fig. 1. In all cases ex-
amined, the coil has inner radius , outer radius
, height , and is wound with
wire turns. The coil inductance can be calculated from (35)
and is found to be 943.6 . The tube is made of 304-type
austenitic stainless steel (nonmagnetic) having a nominal con-
ductivity of and a constant inner surface radius
of . The tube eccentricity is created by changing
the outer surface offset with respect to the inner surface. In ad-
dition, the coil is also given an offset.
Theoretical and numerical results are compared in Table I for
two outer tube surface radii ( and 13 mm), for two outer
tube surface eccentricities ( and 2 mm) and for two coil
position offsets ( and 1 mm). For , the coil is
located next to the thin part of the tube wall, i.e., . For
each combination, we compute the normalized coil resistance
and coil inductive reactance at four frequencies. The normal-
izing factor is the inductance of the bobbin coil in free-space and
the four frequencies are related to the so-called frequency
which is a standard frequency for performing eddy-current tube
testing and is calculated by , where is the
tube conductivity in % IACS and is the tube wall thickness
in mm. The four frequencies, i.e., 13, 26, 52, and 104 kHz cor-
respond to the frequency, which
is about 52 kHz for the particular combination of specific con-
ductivity (2.5% IACS) and tube wall thickness of the concentric
tube with .
Regarding the FEM results, for each geometrical config-
uration a different grid is used with the number of degrees
of freedom (with quadratic elements) ranging from 70 000 to
110 000. The same grid, however, is used for all four frequen-
cies, which means that as frequency is increased the results may
not be as accurate for the real part of the impedance change
due to the smaller skin depth and the abrupt change of the field
across the tube radius. Actually, this is what we observe in the
results of Table I. Other than that, the agreement is excellent.
Computation times for each parameter combination are of the
order of 5 min for FEM and 10 s for the proposed model with
a typical personal computer. Note that we do not simulate the
combination and because in this case
there will be a region in the circumference where the tube wall
thickness will be zero and close to zero and it is extremely diffi-
cult to get results with FEM due to grid construction problems.
Some results (in the form of impedance loci) are shown next,
in the normalized complex impedance plane, which is the ac-
cepted way of presenting eddy-current testing data as they sim-
ulate the display of eddy-current instruments. Fig. 3 shows the
impedance loci produced by increasing the eccentricity of the
outer surface at the four frequencies. In all cases, the coil has no
3890 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 46, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010

TABLE I
COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL RESULTS TO RESULTS FROM FEM FOR THE NORMALIZED COIL IMPEDANCE. THE PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE IS GIVEN SEPARATELY
FOR THE REAL AND IMAGINARY PARTS

Fig. 3. Normalized coil impedance variation for increasing eccentricity at four

frequencies for zero coil offset. The inner and outer radii of the tube are 10
mm and 12 mm, respectively. The curves in the figure are calculated using the
analytical model. The zero eccentricity case corresponds to the smallest value
of normalized reactance in each of the curves.
offset and the tube has an inner radius of 10 mm and outer radius
of 12 mm. Eccentricity is then increased up to the maximum of
2 mm in linear steps of 0.1 mm. The resulting arc-like curves
resemble those produced in the axisymmetric case of a coil in a
concentric tube when the tube wall thickness is decreased (up-
ward movement of impedance loci). Although the increasing ec-
centricity means that in a specific azimuthal region
the tube wall thickness will decrease while in the opposite az-
imuthal region the tube wall thickness will increase,
Fig. 4. Normalized coil impedance variation for increasing eccentricity at 26
kHz and a coil offset of 2 mm at three coil position azimuthal angles. For com-
parison, the normalized coil impedance for zero coil offset is also appended.
The inner and outer radii of the tube are 10 mm and 12 mm, respectively. The
curves in the figure are calculated using the analytical model.
the overall effect in the impedance variation will resemble an av-
erage decrease in the tube wall thickness. If we connected cor-
responding data points at different frequencies, we would get
the frequency curve. Moreover, it is evident from Fig. 3 that the
effect of eccentricity on the impedance is logarithmic as is the
SKARLATOS AND THEODOULIDIS: IMPEDANCE CALCULATION OF A BOBBIN COIL IN A CONDUCTIVE TUBE 3891

effect of all parameters in eddy-current testing. In Fig. 3, we

show results for a linear scale of eccentricity.
Fig. 4 shows impedance loci produced by increasing the tube
eccentricity at . The coil is also offset by 2 mm
with respect to the inner tube surface, at three azimuthal angles.
An angle of corresponds to the coil located on the
thin region of the tube wall, created by tube eccentricity, while
an angle of corresponds to the coil located on the
thick region of the tube wall. The arrow shows the variation
produced by the coil offset in a concentric tube, an increase in
the resistance and decrease in the total reactance of the coil when
it moves towards the inner tube wall and agrees with a previous (40)
observation [12]. Finally, if we connected corresponding data
points at different coil position azimuthal angles we would get
the impedance variation produced by the azimuthal movement
of the coil in an eccentric tube.
with

V. CONCLUSION
An exact model is presented for the interaction of a coil in an
eccentric tube. In the core of the calculations lie the use of the
addition theorem for Bessel functions and the efficient numer-
ical inversion of the resulting linear system for the calculations
of the unknown expansion coefficients. The system of equations
(33) is solved numerically, that is the reason for identifying the
method as semianalytical. The model is very fast and is verified and
by FEM. It can be used in studies of eddy-current tube inspec-
tions and moreover offers the possibility of several extensions.
For example, when adopting integral methods, a Green’s func-
tion can be constructed that will be helpful for modeling defect
inspections in such eccentric tubes. Moreover, the required in-
cident electric field, which is the field produced by the coil in
the tube without defect can be calculated with the model of this
The submatrices , , are diagonal, so their inversion
paper.
is trivial. The subsystem

APPENDIX
The system of equations (33) can be written in the following
way:
is full, hence there is no benefit in trying to reduce it further.
After direct inversion of this subsystem (using Gauss elim-
ination or LU decomposition) and the computation of ,
, the remaining coefficients can be easily obtained by
backsubstitution.
Let us now consider the axisymmetrical mode more closely.
Let , be the diagonal matrices and the excitation vector if
we hold only the zero-mode elements. From (33) we obtain

(39)

where are diagonal matrices. For the axisymmetrical mode

there are zeros around the main diagonal; thus, special
treatment is necessary in order to invert the matrix. They will
be ignored for the moment, and it will be assumed that all the
(41)
submatrices are invertible (the appropriate corrections will be
introduced afterwards). After some manipulations, the system
can be transformed in the following form:
3892
The present form of the matrix is inconvenient since it pos-
sesses zero elements around the main diagonal (second line)
and the previous procedure will collapse. Rearranging the rows
of the zero mode elements we can arrive at an equivalent form
of the matrix which will be invertible using the manipulations
presented above for the nonzero modes. Swapping the second,
third, and fourth lines of the above system and eliminating the
element, we arrive at (42) at the bottom of the page. This
form of the system is compatible with the process introduced
above for the nonzero modes. It suffices to replace the lines of
the initial system which correspond to the zero mode with those
of (42) and to apply the algorithm described above. Attention
must be given to the inversion of the submatrix which is no
more diagonal, but it has an additional line of nonzero elements
apart from its main diagonal. Its inverse however can be easily
obtained and is given by (43) at the bottom of the page.
REFERENCES
[1] N. K. Uzunoglu and J. G. Fikioris, “Scattering from an infinite dielec-
tric cylinder embedded into another,” J. Phys. A: Gen. Phys., vol. 12,
no. 6, pp. 825–834, 1979.
[2] A. A. Kishk, R. P. Parrikar, and A. Z. Elsherbeni, “Electromagnetic
scattering from an eccentric multilayered circular cylinder,” IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 295–303, Mar. 1992.
[3] L. G. Stratigaki, M. P. Ioannidou, and D. P. Chrissoulidis, “Scattering
from a dielectric cylinder with multiple eccentric cylindrical dielectric
inclusions,” IEE Proc—Microw Antennas Propag., vol. 143, no. 6, pp.
505–511, Dec. 1996.
[4] M. P. Ioannidou, K. D. Kapsalas, and D. P. Chrissoulidis, “Electromag-
netic-wave scattering by an eccentrically stratified, dielectric cylinder
with multiple eccentrically stratified, cylindrical, dielectric inclusions,”
J. Electromagn. Waves Appl., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 495–516, 2004.
[5] J. A. Roumeliotis, J. G. Fikioris, and G. P. Gounaris, “Electromagnetic
scattering from an eccentrically coated infinite metallic cylinder,” J.
Appl. Phys., vol. 51, no. 8, pp. 4488–4493, Aug. 1980.
.. .. .. ..
. . . .
.. .. .. ..
. . . .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 46, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010
[6] R. P. Parrikar, A. A. Kishk, and A. Z. Elsherbeni, “Scattering from an
impedance cylinder embedded in a nonconcentric dielectric cylinder,”
IEE Proc—Microw Antennas Propag., vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 169–175,
Apr. 1991.
[7] J. A. Roumeliotis and N. B. Kakogiannos, “Scattering from an infinite
cylinder of small radius embedded into a dielectric one,” IEEE Trans.
Microw. Theory Tech., vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 463–470, Mar. 1994.
[8] C. V. Dodd, C. C. Cheng, and W. E. Deeds, “Induction coils coaxial
with an arbitrary number of cylindrical conductors,” J. Appl. Phys., vol.
45, no. 2, pp. 638–647, Feb. 1974.
[9] W. C. Chew, Waves and Fields in Inhomogeneous Media. New York:
IEEE Press, 1995.
[10] J. R. Lovell and W. C. Chew, “Response of a point source in a multi-
cylindrically layered medium,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol.
25, no. 6, pp. 850–858, Nov. 1987.
[11] J. R. Lovell and W. C. Chew, “Effect of tool eccentricity on some elec-
trical well-logging tools,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 28,
no. 1, pp. 127–136, Jan. 1990.
[12] T. P. Theodoulidis, “Analytical modeling of wobble in eddy current
tube testing with bobbin coils,” Res. Nondestr. Eval., vol. 14, no. 2, pp.
111–126, Jun. 2002.
[13] S. K. Burke and T. P. Theodoulidis, “Impedance of a horizontal coil
in a borehole: A model for eddy-current bolthole probes,” J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 485–494, Feb. 2004.
[14] J. R. Bowler and T. Theodoulidis, “Boundary element calculation of
eddy currents in cylindrical structures containing cracks,” IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 1012–1015, Mar. 2009.
[15] T. Theodoulidis, “Analytical model for tilted coils in eddy-current
nondestructive inspection,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 41, no. 9, pp.
2447–2454, Sep. 2005.
[16] T. Theodoulidis and R. J. Ditchburn, “Mutual impedance of cylindrical
coils at an arbitrary position and orientation above a planar conductor,”
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 3368–3370, Aug. 2007.
[17] T. P. Theodoulidis, “Impedance of an induction coil at the opening
of a borehole in a conductor,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 103, no. 2, pp.
024905–024905-9, Jan. 2008.
[18] T. Theodoulidis and J. R. Bowler, “Interaction of an eddy current coil
with a right-angled conductive wedge,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 46,
no. 4, pp. 1034–1042, Apr. 2010.
[19] G. N. Watson, Theory of Bessel Functions. Cambridge, U.K.: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1952.
[20] G. Micolau, G. Pichenot, D. Premel, D. Lesselier, and M. Lambert,
“Dyad-based model of the electric field in a conductive cylinder at
eddy-current frequencies,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 2, pp.
400–409, Mar. 2004.
(42)
.. .. .. ..
. . . .
(43)
.. .. .. ..
. . . .