ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Eddy Current-Based Identification and Depth Investigation of Microdefects in Steel Filaments.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the field of quality control, the critical challenge of analyzing microdefects in steel filament holds significant importance. This is particularly vital, as steel filaments serve as reinforced fibers in the use and applications within various component manufacturing industries. This paper addresses the crucial requirement of identifying and investigating microdefects in steel filaments. Eddy current signals are used for the identification of microdefects, and an in-depth investigation is conducted. The core objective is to establish the relationship between the depth of defects and the signals detected through the eddy current sensing principle. The threshold of the eddy current instrument was set at 10%, corresponding to a created depth of 20 µm, to identify defective specimens. A total of 30 defective samples were analyzed, and the phase angles between the experimental and theoretical results were compared. The depths of defects ranged from 20 to 60 µm, with one sample having a depth exceeding 75 µm. The calculated threshold of 10.18% closely aligns with the set threshold of 10%, with a difference of only 1.77%. The resulting root mean square error (RMSE) was found to be 10.53 degrees, equivalent to 3.49 µm for the difference in depth and phase between measured results and estimated results. This underscores the methodology's accuracy and its applicability across diverse manufacturing industries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.