MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080923276 · doi:10.1115/ipc2012-90551

Effects of Detector Dynamics on Magnetic Flux Leakage Signals From Dents and Gouges

2012· article· en· W2080923276 on OpenAlexaff
L. Clapham, Vijay Babbar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic flux leakageDetectorMagnetLeakage (economics)AcousticsSIGNAL (programming language)Nondestructive testingTrailing edgeMagnetic fluxMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringMagnetic fieldEngineeringMechanicsPhysicsElectrical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study was designed to model the dynamic effects of detector ride and magnet liftoff on Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) signals from dents as well as gouges that have significant denting. The MFL tools have long been used for the detection and sizing of corrosion defects. This is comparatively straightforward for a number of reasons, one of which is that the MFL detector assembly can ride relatively smoothly along the inner pipe wall surface. This is not the case when significant denting is present, since the dent presents a perturbation in the pipe wall that can cause liftoff of the detector or magnet system. Since the tool travels at relatively high speeds down the pipe, the dent itself can cause the detector to lose contact with the trailing half of the dent. In addition, the magnet pole piece may experience partial liftoff as it traverses the dent, thus causing a change in the local flux density. In this study results from ‘static’ measurements are compared with a dynamic case in which detector liftoff is simulated through modeling and experiment. Results are discussed regarding the severity of MFL signal loss at the trailing edge of the defect as a result of detector liftoff. The effect of partial liftoff of the magnet as it passes over the dent is also examined. Magnet liftoff is found to increase the local magnetic flux near the liftoff region, causing the MFL signal from the dent wall to increase rather than decrease in the vicinity of magnet liftoff region.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207