Comparison of Analytical Eddy Current Models Using Principal Components Analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Contant, S. [1 ,2 ]
Luloff, M. [1 ,2 ]
Morelli, J. [2 ]
Krause, T. W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Mil Coll Canada, Dept Phys, Kingston, ON, Canada
[2] Queens Univ, Dept Phys Engn Phys & Astron, Kingston, ON, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
PROBE;
D O I
10.1063/1.4974681
中图分类号
O59 [应用物理学];
学科分类号
摘要
Monitoring the gap between the pressure tube (PT) and the calandria tube (CT) in CANDU (R) fuel channels is essential, as contact between the two tubes can lead to delayed hydride cracking of the pressure tube. Multifrequency transmit-receive eddy current non-destructive evaluation is used to determine this gap, as this method has different depths of penetration and variable sensitivity to noise, unlike single frequency eddy current non-destructive evaluation. An Analytical model based on the Dodd and Deeds solutions, and a second model that accounts for normal and lossy self- inductances, and a non-coaxial pickup coil, are examined for representing the response of an eddy current transmit-receive probe when considering factors that affect the gap response, such as pressure tube wall thickness and pressure tube resistivity. The multifrequency model data was analyzed using principal components analysis (PCA), a statistical method used to reduce the data set into a data set of fewer variables. The results of the PCA of the analytical models were then compared to PCA performed on a previously obtained experimental data set. The models gave similar results under variable PT wall thickness conditions, but the non-coaxial coil model, which accounts for self-inductive losses, performed significantly better than the Dodd and Deeds model under variable resistivity conditions.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Identification of state models using principal components analysis
    Hartnett, MK
    Lightbody, G
    Irwin, GW
    CHEMOMETRICS AND INTELLIGENT LABORATORY SYSTEMS, 1999, 46 (02) : 181 - 196
  • [2] Analysis of Pulsed Eddy Current - GMR Data Using Principal Component Analysis
    Yang, Guang
    Kim, Jaejoon
    Udpa, Lalita
    Udpa, Satish
    ELECTROMAGNETIC NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (XIII), 2010, 33 : 207 - 214
  • [3] Parameter Analysis of Pulsed Eddy Current Sensor Using Principal Component Analysis
    Nafiah, Faris
    Tokhi, Mohammad Osman
    Shirkoohi, Gholamhossein
    Duan, Fang
    Zhao, Zhanfang
    Asfis, Giorgos
    Rudlin, John
    IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, 2021, 21 (05) : 6897 - 6903
  • [4] Comparison of Principal Components Analysis, Independent Components Analysis and Common Components Analysis
    Rutledge D.N.
    Journal of Analysis and Testing, 2018, 2 (3) : 235 - 248
  • [5] Binary Data Comparison using Similarity Indices and Principal Components Analysis
    Kane, Nouhoun
    Aznag, Khalid
    El Oirrak, Ahmed
    Kaddioui, Mohammed
    INTERNATIONAL ARAB JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 13 (02) : 232 - 237
  • [6] Principal Components Analysis of Multifrequency Eddy Current Data Used to Measure Pressure Tube to Calandria Tube Gap
    Shokralla, Shaddy
    Morelli, Jordan E.
    Krause, Thomas W.
    IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, 2016, 16 (09) : 3147 - 3154
  • [7] Soil property analysis using principal components analysis, soil line, and regression models
    Fox, GA
    Metla, R
    SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 2005, 69 (06) : 1782 - 1788
  • [8] Research on edge identification of a defect using pulsed eddy current based on principal component analysis
    Yang BinFeng
    Luo FeiLu
    Han Dan
    NDT & E INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 40 (04) : 294 - 299
  • [9] Rime samples characterization and comparison using classical and fuzzy principal components analysis
    Klimaszewska, Kamila
    Sarbu, Costel
    Polkowska, Zaneta
    Blas, Marek
    Sobik, Mieczyslaw
    Namiesnik, Jacek
    CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY, 2008, 6 (02): : 208 - 215
  • [10] A temporal and spatial comparison of independent components analysis and principal components analysis.
    Khoe, W
    Dien, J
    Mangun, GR
    JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 1999, : 28 - 28