A Novel Magnetic Equivalent Circuit Approach in Magnetic Flux Leakage Test System Design

Öz

Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) is a widely used non-destructive testing method for ferromagnetic materials in the industry. Using this method, defects occurring within the material structure are detected, and their characteristics are evaluated. The design of the MFL test system, which performs the inspection process, is of critical importance for the reliable and accurate detection of these defects. Although three-dimensional (3D) magnetic analysis simulations used during the design phase produce highly accurate results, they incur high computational and time costs. An alternative approach to reducing this computational burden is the design of the MFL test system using the Magnetic Equivalent Circuit (MEC) method. In this study, a novel Segmented MEC (SMEC) model is proposed for magnetic system design. The validity of the developed SMEC model was tested on an MFL test system design. For this purpose, a sample MFL test system was analyzed in a 3D FEM simulation environment, and the obtained data were recorded as a performance reference. Subsequently, both the conventional MEC and the proposed SMEC models were developed for the designed MFL test system, and analysis results were generated. The performances of both methods were examined by taking the 3D FEM results as a reference. The findings demonstrate that the SMEC model achieves approximately 11% higher accuracy than the conventional MEC model.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Electromagnetic non-destructive testing
• magnetic flux leakage
• segmented magnetic equivalent circuit.

Manyetik Akı Kaçağı Test Sistemi Tasarımında Yeni Bir Manyetik Eşdeğer Devre Yaklaşımı

Öz

Manyetik Akı Kaçağı (MFL), endüstride ferromanyetik malzemeler için yaygın olarak kullanılan tahribatsız bir test yöntemidir. Bu yöntem kullanılarak, malzeme yapısında oluşan kusurlar tespit edilir ve özellikleri değerlendirilir. Muayene işlemini gerçekleştiren MFL test sisteminin tasarımı, bu kusurların güvenilir ve doğru bir şekilde tespit edilmesi için kritik öneme sahiptir. Tasarım aşamasında kullanılan üç boyutlu (3D) manyetik analiz simülasyonları oldukça doğru sonuçlar üretse de, yüksek hesaplama ve zaman maliyetlerine neden olmaktadır. Bu hesaplama yükünü azaltmanın alternatif bir yolu, Manyetik Eşdeğer Devre (MEC) yöntemi kullanılarak MFL test sisteminin tasarlanmasıdır. Bu çalışmada, manyetik sistem tasarımı için yeni bir Bölümlü MEC (SMEC) modeli önerilmiştir. Geliştirilen SMEC modelinin geçerliliği, bir MFL test sistemi tasarımı üzerinde test edilmiştir. Bu amaçla, örnek bir MFL test sistemi 3D FEM simülasyon ortamında analiz edilmiş ve elde edilen veriler performans referansı olarak kaydedilmiştir. Daha sonra, tasarlanan MFL test sistemi için hem geleneksel MEC hem de önerilen SMEC modelleri geliştirildi ve analiz sonuçları üretildi. Her iki yöntemin performansı, 3D FEM sonuçları referans alınarak incelendi. Bulgular, SMEC modelinin geleneksel MEC modeline göre yaklaşık %11 daha yüksek doğruluk sağladığını göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• manyetik akı kaçağı
• Elektromanyetik tahribatsız muayene
• bölümlü manyetik eşdeğer devre.

Kaynakça

1. [1] Wang, Y., Guo, J., Hu, T., Shi, Q., & Deng, Z. (2024). Machine learning-based dipole modeling of 3-D magnetic flux leakage caused by outer-surface linear cracks for pipeline in-line inspection. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 73, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2024.3470020
2. [2] Narang, R., Chandrasekaran, K., & Gupta, A. (2017). Experimental investigation and simulation of magnetic flux leakage from metal loss defects. Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention, 17(3), 595–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-017-0286-3
3. [3] Peng, X., Anyaoha, U., Liu, Z., & Tsukada, K. (2020). Analysis of magnetic-flux leakage (MFL) data for pipeline corrosion assessment. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 56(6). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2020.2981450
4. [4] Li, H., Liu, J., Yang, H., Zuo, F., Zhang, S., & Lu, S. (2026). Toward stable automated pipeline inspection: Spatio-temporal feature learning for magnetic flux leakage-based integrity assessment. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 179(pt. 1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2026.115204
5. [5] Li, C., Lyu, Y., Meng, X., Li, L., & Pu, X. (2025). Research on intelligent defect recognition in oil and gas pipeline magnetic flux leakage detection based on YOLOv8. Chinese Journal of Scientific Instrument, 46(2), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.19650/j.cnki.cjsi.J2413188
6. [6] Durai, M., Lin, Z., Lan, C., Chang, H., & Peng, C. (2022). Study of defects in the petrochemical storage tank floor using the magnetic flux leakage (MFL) technique. Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention, 22(2), 807–814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-022-01373-1
7. [7] Gong, W., Akbar, M. F., Jawad, G. N., Shrifan, N. H. M. M., & Zhang, F. (2024). A magnetic field concentration method for magnetic flux leakage detection of rail-top surface cracks. IEEE Access, 12, 43245–43254. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3377692
8. [8] Singh, W., Rao, B., Mukhopadhyay, C., & Jayakumar, T. (2015). Detection of localized damage in water wall tubes of thermal power plants using GMR sensor array based magnetic flux leakage technique. Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-015-0295-7

9. [9] Kikuchi, H., Sato, K., Shimizu, I., Kamada, Y., & Kobayashi, S. (2011). Feasibility study of application of MFL to monitoring of wall thinning under reinforcing plates in nuclear power plants. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 47(10), 3963–3966. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2011.2147296
10. [10] Wang, Y., Li, C., Zhang, S., Wu, B., & Liu, X. (2026). A novel magnetic flux leakage sensor based on the T-shaped magnetization method for detecting defects in wind turbine tower welding seams. IEEE Sensors Journal, 26(8), 11717–11730. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2026.3670882
11. [11] Lam, Q. M., Duong, V. T., Phan, H. L., Nguyen, T. T., & Nguyen, H. H. (2024). Parametric design methodology for yoke-magnetization in magnetic flux leakage detection systems. Results in Engineering, 23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.102669
12. [12] Chang, Y., Jiao, J., Li, G., Liu, X., He, C., & Wu, B. (2017). Effects of excitation system on the performance of magnetic-flux-leakage-type non-destructive testing. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 268, 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2017.08.009
13. [13] Zhong, Y., Wang, G., Yu, X., Jia, L., Wang, L., & Zhang, H. (2025). Defect size quantification for pipeline dynamic MFL detection via 3-D dynamic magnetic dipole forward model. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 74. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2025.3541813
14. [14] Wang, L., Zhang, H., Liu, J., Qu, F., & Zuo, F. (2023). Defect size quantification for pipeline magnetic flux leakage detection system via multilevel knowledge-guided neural network. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 70(9), 9550–9560. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2022.3210557
15. [15] Kara, O., & Çelik, H. H. (2023). The homogeneity effects of magnetic flux density distribution on the detection of railhead surface defects via the magnetic flux leakage method. Insight - Non-Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring, 65, 682–688. https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2023.65.12.682
16. [16] Feng, B., Wu, J. B., Yang, Y., & Kang, Y. H. (2013). Magnetizing method for high precision MFL inspection of longitudinal defects of thick wall steel pipe. Advanced Materials Research, 718-720, 898–902. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.718-720.898
17. [17] Wu, J., Fang, H., Wang, J., & Kang, Y. (2015). The influence of non-uniform wall thickness on MFL testing for a steel pipe. Insight - Non-Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring, 57(12), 703–708. https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2015.57.12.703
18. [18] Yuan, Y., Darmani, M. A., Bao, Y., Zhang, X., Gerada, D., & Zhang, H. (2025). Analysis of circulating current in electrical machines using mesh-based magnetic equivalent circuit. IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, 11(5), 11410–11419. https://doi.org/10.1109/TTE.2025.3576887
19. [19] Nasiri-Zarandi, R., Toulabi, M. S., & Karami-Shahnani, A. (2022). Two-segment magnet transverse flux ferrite PM generator for direct-drive wind turbine applications: Nonlinear 3-D MEC modeling and experimental validation. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 37(3), 1834–1843. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2022.3146547
20. [20] Kara, O., & Çelik, H. H. (2024). A novel nonlinear magnetic equivalent circuit model for magnetic flux leakage system. Applied Sciences, 14(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/app14104071
21. [21] Hou, J., Geng, W., Li, Q., & Zhang, Z. (2021). 3-D equivalent magnetic network modeling and FEA verification of a novel axial-flux hybrid-excitation in-wheel motor. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 57(7). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2021.3081830
22. [22] Sixdenier, F., & Raulet, M. A. (2012). Current sensor modeling with a FE-tuned MEC: Parameters identification protocol. IEEE Sensors Journal, 12(5), 859–863. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2011.2165841
23. [23] Ghods, M., Tabarniarami, Z., Faiz, J., & Bazrafshan, M. A. (2024). Turn-to-turn and phase-to-phase short circuit fault detection of wind turbine permanent magnet generator based on equivalent magnetic network modelling by wavelet transform approach. IET Electrical Power Applications, 18(9), 1005–1020. https://doi.org/10.1049/elp2.12452
24. [24] Vu, T. N., Viet, T. N., & Anh, T. P. (2025). Utilize the equivalent magnetic circuit and magnet coverage to figure out the magnetic field of the air gap and stator tooth of an axial flux permanent magnet generator. International Journal of Renewable Energy Research, 15(2), 353–362.
25. [25] Wang, Y., Pang, J., Cai, X., & Hou, L. (2026). High-frequency modeling of three-phase transformers considering inter-phase and capacitive coupling based on enhanced magnetic circuit. IEEE Access, 14, 96940–96954. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3706512
26. [26] Yuan, Y., Darmani, M. A., Bao, Y., Zhang, X., Gerada, D., & Zhang, H. (2024). Analysis of proximity loss of electrical machines using mesh-based magnetic equivalent circuit. IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, 10(4), 9467–9477. https://doi.org/10.1109/TTE.2024.3383845
27. [27] Wang, X., Fan, Y., Chen, Q., & Wu, Z. (2023). Magnetic circuit feature investigation of a radial axial brushless hybrid excitation machine for electric vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, 9(1), 382–393. https://doi.org/10.1109/TTE.2022.3199435
28. [28] Yuksel, V., Tetik, Y. E., Basturk, M. O., Recepoglu, O., Gokce, K., & Cimen, M. A. (2023). A novel cascaded deep learning model for the detection and quantification of defects in pipelines via magnetic flux leakage signals. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 72. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2023.3284931
29. [29] Sudhoff, S. D. (2021). Power Magnetic Devices: A Multi-Objective Design Approach (2nd ed.). Wiley-IEEE Press.
30. [30] Derbas, H. W., Williams, J. M., Koenig, A. C., & Pekarek, S. D. (2009). A comparison of nodal- and mesh-based magnetic equivalent circuit models. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 24(2), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2008.2002037