ARTICLE IN PRESS

NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

NDT&E International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

High-speed inspection of rails using ACFM techniques

M.Ph. Papaelias a,, M.C. Lugg b, C. Roberts a, C.L. Davis a
a
b

Rail Research Centre, The University of Birmingham Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
TSC Inspection Systems, 6 Mill Square, Featherstone Road, Milton Keynes MK12 5RB, UK

a r t i c l e in f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 2 August 2008
Received in revised form
13 December 2008
Accepted 18 December 2008
Available online 20 February 2009

High-speed ACFM tests were carried out using a rotary test piece that contained spark-eroded notches.
The ACFM sensor detected the induced notches during inspection at 121.5 km/h. The recorded signal
remained unaffected by the increases in inspection speed under constant lift-off. To simulate actual rail
inspection conditions at high speed, further tests were carried out using a spinning rail rig and a set of
rails that contained spark-eroded notches of various shapes and sizes up to a speed of 32 km/h.
Although, the ACFM sensor successfully detected the majority of the notches, the signal obtained was
affected by lift-off variations.
& 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Rail inspection
ACFM
Crack detection
Rolling contact fatigue
Electromagnetic

1. Introduction
Ultrasonic rail inspection is carried out by a variety of different
instruments ranging from hand-held devices, through dualpurpose road/track vehicles to test xtures that are towed or
carried by dedicated rail cars. Unfortunately, the performance of
existing conventional ultrasonic probes in detecting small
(o4 mm) surface defects such as head checks and gauge corner
cracking is inadequate during high-speed inspection, particularly
above 15 km/h. Fig. 1 shows a rail containing typical rolling
contact fatigue (RCF) cracking. Furthermore, the presence of larger
and more critical internal defects can be shadowed by clusters of
smaller surface cracks during ultrasonic testing. Inspection
systems based on the simultaneous use of conventional ultrasonic
transducers with magnetic ux leakage (MFL) sensors have a
higher probability of detecting smaller near-surface and surfacebreaking defects in the rail head. However, as inspection speed
increases, the performance of MFL sensors tends to deteriorate
rapidly due to a reduction in the magnetic ux density arising
from the eddy current excitation [13]. The use of higher
magnetic elds to compensate for the reduction in magnetic ux
density may not be straight forward due to the potential
interference with the electronic equipment installed on rail
tracks. More recently, pulsed eddy current (PEC) probes have
been added on certain ultrasonic test trains to offer increased
sensitivity in the detection of surface defects at inspection speeds

 Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 121 414626; fax: +44 121 414429.

E-mail address: m.papaelias@bham.ac.uk (M.Ph. Papaelias).

0963-8695/$ - see front matter & 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2008.12.008

up to 75 km/h [49]. PEC probes perform far better than MFL

sensors at higher inspection speeds but are affected more by liftoff variation. Therefore, it is imperative that the distance of the
eddy current probes from the surface of the rail (lift-off) does not
exceed 2 mm and is kept as a constant as possible during the
inspection process. This can be particularly difcult depending on
the quality of the surface of the track (e.g. presence of corrugation
and prole variations).
In contrast to PEC sensors that are required to be placed at a
close and constant distance from the inspected surface, a
maximum operating lift-off of 5 mm is possible with tolerable
reduction in the signal when using alternating current eld
measurement (ACFM) probes [10]. This is due to the fact that the
defect signal strength diminishes with the square of lift-off, not
with its cube which is the case for eddy current sensors and hence
this enables the ACFM technique to cope with much greater liftoff [10]. In PEC testing the change in the impedance of the current
inducer or coil is used to gain information about the surface and
near-surface condition of the component under inspection, while
in the ACFM method a constant current source drives the inducer
to ensure a constant incident eld and a magnetic eld sensor is
used to monitor the surface magnetic eld variations. The
advantage of the ACFM technique over PEC sensors is that in
ACFM testing the signal represents the actual magnetic eld
perturbations and not a global variation. The ACFM technique is
capable of both detecting and sizing (length and depth) surfacebreaking cracks in metals based on the thin-skin theory developed
by Lewis, Michael, Lugg and Collins (LMLC theory) [11].
Under certain conditions ACFM can be applied for the detection
of near-surface defects, however, this strongly depends on the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

329

Bz
Clockwise flow
gives Bz peak
Uniform input current
z
x

Anti-clockwise
flow gives Bz
trough

Fig. 1. Typical RCF cracking found in rails (photograph is courtesy of Dr. Garnham).

electromagnetic properties of the metal under inspection. Typically, the maximum skin depth achieved during inspection with
ACFM systems varies from 0.1 mm for carbon steels to 6 mm for
stainless steel.

Current lines
close together
gives Bx peak

Current lines far

apart gives
Bx trough

2. ACFM principle

Bx
The ACFM technique, also known as the electric current
perturbation (ECM) method, is based on the principle that an
alternating current (AC) can be induced to ow in a thin skin near
the surface of any conductor. By introducing a remote uniform
current into an area of the component under test, when there are
no defects present the electrical current will be undisturbed. If a
crack is present, the uniform current is disturbed and the current
ows around the ends and down the faces of the crack. Because
the current is an alternating current it ows in a thin skin close to
the surface and is unaffected by the overall geometry of the
component.
Associated with the current owing in the surface is a
magnetic eld above the surface which, like the current in the
surface, will be disturbed in the presence of a defect. An important
factor of the ACFM technique is its ability to relate measurements
of the magnetic eld disturbance to the size of defect that caused
that disturbance. The development of the method came from a
combination of research studies, which provided mathematical
modelling of the magnetic eld rather than electrical elds, and
advances in electronics and sensing technology [1119]. Despite
the fact that the magnetic eld above the surface is a complex
three-dimensional eld, it is possible, by choosing suitable
orthogonal axes, to measure components of the eld that are
indicative of the nature of the disturbance and which can be
related to the physical properties of any cracks present. Fig. 2
presents a plan view of a surface-breaking crack where a uniform
AC current is owing. The eld component denoted by Bz
corresponds to the poles generated as the current ows around
the ends of the crack introducing current rotations in the plane of
the component. These responses are principally at the crack ends
and are indicative of a crack length. The eld component denoted
by Bx corresponds to the reduction in current surface density as
the current ows down the crack and is indicative of the depth of
the defects. Generally, the current is introduced perpendicular to
the expected direction of cracking. In practice, special probes have
been developed which contain a remote eld induction system,
for introducing the eld into the component, together with special
combined magnetic eld sensors that allow accurate measurement of the components of the magnetic eld at the same point in

Fig. 2. Denition of eld directions and co-ordinate system used in ACFM.

space. The probe requires no electrical contact with the component and can therefore be applied without the removal of surface
contaminants.
ACFM probes are available as standard pencil probes and
multi-element array probes. These probes can be customised to
optimise inspection of particular structural components and
maximise the probability of detection (PoD) of critical-sized
defects. ACFM pencil probes can detect surface-breaking defects
in any orientation. Nonetheless, in order to size defects, they need
to lie between 01 and 301 to the direction of travel of the probe.
This drawback is overcome in ACFM arrays by incorporating
various eld inducers to allow a eld to be introduced within the
inspected surface in other orientations. This is particularly useful
in situations where the crack orientation is unknown or variable.
In this case, additional sensors, denoted by By, are also
incorporated in order to take full advantage of the additional
input eld directions.

3. Experimental details for the turning lathe tests

ACFM array probes are already commercially available for
manual rail inspection in the form of a pedestrian walking stickbased instrument [10,2022]. To make best use of an ACFM array
probe, it is necessary to switch through the sensors as quickly as
possible in order to allow rapid inspection. However, there are
inherent limitations to this including switching settling times,
data transfer rates and limitations in the sampling of a 5 kHz
signal. With conventional analogue electronics these factors limit
the speed of scan for array probes to around 0.5 km/h for a single
eld 16-channel array. In order to improve the applicability of the
ACFM array probes a high-speed instrument has been developed
which allows scanning speeds 45 times faster than with
conventional ACFM instrument. This has been achieved by

ARTICLE IN PRESS
330

M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

increasing the energising frequency from 5 to 50 kHz together

with modications to the signal processing electronics [21,22]. By
increasing sampling rates to 50 kHz the walking stick system can
achieve scanning speeds of 3 km/h.
In the experiments reported herewith, inspection speeds of up
to 121.5 km/h were carried out using a turning lathe test rig. The
applicability of an ACFM array at this stage of development was
not obvious mainly due to limitations in the existing instrumentation. For these reasons, a high-speed single-channel micropencil probe manufactured by TSC Inspection Systems was
utilised instead. The pencil probe operates at a frequency of
50 kHz and was driven by a commercial TSC AMIGO instrument
[23]. The data obtained were logged using customised software on
a PC which incorporated a high-speed data acquisition board. The
data acquisition rate during tests was 1 MHz.
To test the overall capability and performance of the ACFM
system at high inspection speeds under controlled experimental
conditions a special rotary test piece was manufactured as shown
in Fig. 3. The material used for manufacturing the rotary test piece
was a 0.9 wt% C steel to make sure that the microstructure, as well
as the relative magnetic permeability and electrical conductivity
are similar to those exhibited by conventional 260 rail steel grade
(typically 0.70.8 wt% C), with both steels having a predominantly
pearlitic microstructure. The rotary test piece had a 230 mm
diameter and was 60 mm thick with a bore in the centre 190 mm
in diameter and 50 mm deep.
Four transverse notches (2  2 mm and 2  4 mm deep with a
at prole) were spark eroded at the centre of the 20 mm wide
rim of the sample. Each notch was 10 mm long and 0.5 mm wide.
The sample was placed in a turning lathe capable of rotating the
test piece between 1 and 3000 rpm. The rotational speed of 1 rpm
for this experimental setup corresponded to the equivalent of a
surface speed of 0.0405 km/h at the centre of the notch (i.e. 10 mm
away from the edge of the rim) and hence at 3000 rpm the surface
speed of the sample at the centre of the notches was 121.5 km/h.
The ACFM probe was positioned opposite to the centre of the
notches and at a 01 angle with reference to their surface orientation as shown in Fig. 4. The initial constant lift-off of the ACFM
probe with regards to the surface of the rotating sample was
0.8 mm. Tests were carried out with a lift-off of up to 5 mm in
order to evaluate the effect of increasing distance between the
surface of the inspected sample and the probe on the ACFM signal.
During experiments, the data were logged on the PC and then
plotted using customised software. Further development of the
software used is currently under way to enable plotting of the

2mm deep

Rotary sample

ACFM Probe

Fig. 4. Experimental setup for the turning lathe tests using the rotary test piece.

data in real time. The data logged during these tests were the
ACFM probe signal (i.e. analogue-to-digital conversion of probe
voltage) with time. Data were collected for various speeds,
starting from equivalent surface speeds of 4.5 km/h (at 100 rpm)
up to 121.5 km/h (at 3000 rpm) as discussed furthur.

4. Results for the turning lathe tests

4mm deep

Spark eroded notch

4mm deep

2mm deep

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the rotary test piece with four spark-eroded notches.

Using the aforementioned sensor conguration, the current

introduced in the sample ows perpendicular to the orientation of
the notches causing it to be disturbed in a circumferential
direction and thus allowing the notches to be sized. Although,
the prime objective of the turning lathe experiments was to
evaluate the applicability of the ACFM probe for high-speed
detection and not the accurate quantication of depth and surface
length of the spark-eroded notches, through the sensor conguration employed it was possible to obtain correct rankings for
each notch in terms of its depth as shown from the data plots
presented herewith.
Tests were carried out initially at a relatively slow speed of
4.5 km/h (100 rpm) and 0.8 mm lift-off in order to ascertain that
the ACFM micro-pencil probe was capable of detecting all four
notches. After verifying that the notches were detected by the
ACFM system, the inspection speed was increased progressively

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

890

81km/h

880

A/D Conversion

870
860
850
840
830

2mm notch

880
A/D Conversion

870
860
850
840
830
820
810
0.00

0.01

0.03

0.02

0.04

0.05

Time / s
Fig. 7. ACFM data plots showing the effect of increasing lift-off at 81 km/h.

890
880
870
860
850
840
830 4mm notch
820
810
800
790
780
770
760
750
4mm notch
740
730
720
710
700
690
0.00
0.01

0.8mm lift-off (81km/h)

3mm
4mm

2mm
5mm

2mm
notch

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Time / s

820

Fig. 8. Normalised ACFM data plots for various lift-offs at 81 km/h.

4mm notch

810
0.00

0.01

0.02
0.03
Time / s

0.04

0.05

Fig. 5. ACFM data plot at 81 km/h with 0.8 mm probe lift-off.

20.25km/h

890

121.5km/h

880
A/D Conversion

2mm
5mm

0.8mm lift-off (81km/h)

3mm
4mm

890

A/D Conversion

up to 121.5 km/h while maintaining a constant lift-off. The plot in

Fig. 5 shows the changes in the probe signal caused by the
presence of the notches vs. time at an inspection speed of 81 km/
h. It is evident that the data pattern repeats itself during each
revolution signifying that this experimental setup provides a
suitable platform for reproducible inspection conditions which
allows the repeatability of the ACFM tests to be assessed.
Moreover, the signal intensity arising from the presence of a
2 mm notch can be clearly distinguished from that of a 4 mm
notch, hence, offering a measure of quantication.
Comparison of the data acquired at various inspection speeds
while maintaining a 0.8 mm lift-off showed that the amplitude of
the signal remains unaltered. As shown in Fig. 6, at an inspection
speed of 20.25 km/h the amplitude of the signal is virtually the
same as that acquired at a speed of 121.5 km/h (any variations
seen are within the noise level of the measurement). In addition,
noise levels in the obtained signal are also similar throughout the
inspection speed range of these tests.
Further tests carried out with increasing lift-offs (2, 3, 4 and
5 mm) at the same inspection speed range (4.5121.5 km/h)
showed a square reduction in the ACFM defect signal amplitude
as expected. Therefore, as seen from the plots in Fig. 7 for an
inspection speed equal to 81 km/h, the signal arising for a 2 mm
notch at 0.8 mm lift-off is comparable to that arising for a 4 mm
notch at 2 mm lift-off. Similarly, the signal acquired due to the

331

870
860
850

presence of a 4 mm notch at a probe lift-off of 3 mm is comparable

to the signal obtained for a 2 mm notch for a 2 mm probe lift-off.
Fig. 8 shows the normalised data plots for the full lift-off range
(0.85 mm) during tests at 81 km/h. Although, the test notches
were detectable at all lift-offs used, the results obtained in these
experiments suggest that probe lift-off during inspection under
eld conditions is a signicant factor which needs to be controlled
and taken into account if accurate quantication of RCF cracking is
to be achieved. Another interesting feature in the plots of nonnormalised raw data shown in Fig. 7 is that the overall ACFM
signal decreases with increasing lift-off. Therefore, by quantifying
the reduction in the overall ACFM signal it may be possible to
evaluate any lift-off variations that may occur during actual
inspection. This is currently a part of on-going work.

840

5. Experimental details for the spinning rail rig tests

830
820
810
0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Time / s
Fig. 6. ACFM data plots showing the resulting signals at 20.25 and 121.5 km/h with
0.8 mm lift-off.

A 3.6 m diameter spinning rail rig capable of rotating at speeds

between 1 and 80 km/h (shown in Fig. 9) was used to assess the
ACFM technique using idealised defects on rails. A special set of
eight 1.41-m-long-curved rails containing articially induced
notches were produced, including half-face slots machined
normal to the railhead surface, clusters of angled slots, and
pocket-shaped defects more typical of actual RCF defects. The

ARTICLE IN PRESS
332

M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

notches were spark eroded in the test rails using a 0.7-mm-thick

wire. The shapes and sizes of the induced defects were chosen in
such a way as to enable their use as calibration samples for
various NDT technologies. The depth of the notches varied
between 2 and 15 mm, while for more realistic representation of
RCF cracking certain notches were angled with respect to the
surface normal and the rail edge and the railhead surface. RCF
head checks detected in rails are often inclined to the surface,
penetrating initially at a shallow angle of approximately 15301
until they reach a characteristic depth and turn down into the
railhead at an angle of approximately 601 [24,25]. Fig. 10 shows a
plan view schematic of sample rails and induced notches. The
induced articial pocket-shaped defects contained in rail samples
designated #7 and #8 are the ones that more closely resemble
actual RCF cracks.
During the ACFM tests with the spinning rail rig, the micropencil probe used for the turning lathe tests was installed on a
customised trolley as shown in Fig. 11. It was found that the probe
lift-off varied between 1 and 6.5 mm during a complete rotation of

Fig. 9. The spinning rail rig at the University of Birmingham.

the rig as seen from the plot in Fig. 12. The fact that lift-off
variations existed within each test rail due to bowing, affected the
ACFM measurements, since the trolley used was designed to
compensate for lift-off variations from rail-to-rail and not within
each rail. Lift-off occurring due to bowing in the individual test
rails meant that the probe stand-off was highest at the centre of
each rail where the notches were present. This sort of lift-off
variation is not expected in real-life inspection of rails.

6. Results for the spinning rail rig tests

ACFM tests were carried out initially with the pencil probe at a
slow speed (manual tests at 0.1 km/h) and zero lift-off to verify

Fig. 11. Experimental setup during the spinning rail rig tests. The ACFM probe can
be seen in the foreground.

Fig. 10. Schematic showing the test rails for the rail rig tests. Vd vertical depth of the notch in mm, ha horizontal angle of orientation in degrees, va vertical angle of
orientation in degrees. The values in mm shown on top and at the ends of each rails illustrate the probe lift-off at that particular section during the rig tests.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

that the system could detect every notch induced on the test rails.
Following these tests, the probe was installed on the customised
trolley and the rig was rotated at 1.6 km/h, progressively
increasing the speed of the spinning rig up to 32 km/h.
The probe was positioned in such a way that the induced
current owed in the longitudinal direction of the rail head. As
shown in Fig. 10, the notches to be inspected are at a 01 or 351
surface angle with respect to the probe orientation and 901 or 251
to the railhead surface. Although the main objective of these tests
was to verify the capability of detection of the ACFM probe at high
speeds under simulated rail inspection conditions, for these
orientations, the ACFM system used should also be able to offer
a quantitative measure of the depth of the notches detected.
However, due to lift-off variations that occurred during testing it
was impossible to obtain correct rankings for all inspected
notches, while certain notches were not positively detected.
The plots in Fig. 13 show the data obtained for rails #5 and #3
at a speed of 2.3 km/h. The effect of lift-off variation can be clearly

Probe Lift-off Variation

Probe Lift-off / mm

7
6

5
4
5

6
7

6
7

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Distance / cm
Fig. 12. Probe lift-off variation for a complete rail rig rotation. The letters signify
the lift-off for each test rail.

333

seen by the changes in the overall ACFM signal plot. However, the
induced notches were clearly detected in both rails. Rail #5
contained three groups of clustered notches (notches with depths
2, 10 and 4 mm) as demonstrated in Fig. 10. Each clustered group
of notches had a different spacing between the notches of the
cluster of 5, 10 and 15 mm, respectively. The reason for using
clustered notches was to assess the capability of the sensor in
resolving the presence of individual defects when clustered. As
seen in the ACFM data plot in Fig. 13, despite the fact that all three
clusters of induced notches have been detected, it has not been
possible to resolve individual notches within the clusters due to
the high probe lift-off involved during the experiments (more
than 4 mm). The plot in Fig. 14 shows the ACFM data acquired for
rails #5 and #3 at an inspection speed of 32 km/h. The data
acquired at an inspection speed of 2.3 km/h is virtually identical to
that obtained at 32 km/h as expected from the lathe tests.
Evaluation of the ACFM data acquired for the pocket-shaped
articial notches in rails #7 and #8, which were designed to
resemble more closely actual RCF cracking, revealed that the 2 and
4 mm deep pocket-shaped notches were not detected at all while
the deeper and longer pocket-shaped notches (i.e. 6, 10 and 15 mm
deep) produced a very weak signal and were barely detectable. It
should be noted here that the notches in rails #1#6 had a surface
length that run from the edge to the centre of the railhead, while
the pocket-shaped notches had a signicantly smaller surface
length (i.e. 10 mm for the 2 mm deep notch). The data plot in
Fig. 15 shows the ACFM signal obtained for the three pocketshaped notches in rail 8. The signal obtained is much weaker than
that obtained for the notches in rail #3, despite the fact that the
lift-off variation is similar for both rails (45 mm). This
discrepancy, when comparing the intensity of the signals for
the pocket-shaped notches with the at-proled notches in the
other rails at similar lift-off has been attributed to the smaller
surface length of the pocket-shaped notches as well as the lift-off
effect. In ACFM measurements, the reduction in the signal with
increasing lift-off is greater as the surface length of the defect
decreases.

Fig. 13. Raw and normalised ltered data plots for test rails #5 and #3 at 2.3 km/h.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
334

M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

Raw data at 32km/h

900

Signal caused by the gap

between two test rails

Filtered data (Normalised)

groups of 3 notches
2, 10, 4mm

880
860
840

2mm notch

A/D Conversion

820

4mm notch
6mm notch
10mm notch

800
780
760
740

15mm
10mm spacing
5mm
spacing spacing

720
700
680
660
640
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

Time / s
Fig. 14. Raw and normalised ltered data plots for test rails #5 and #3 at 32 km/h.

Raw data at 32km/h

Filtered data (Normalised)

Signal due to rail gap

880
860
840

A/D Conversion

820
800
6mm notch

780

10mm notch

15mm notch

760
740
720
700
680
660
0.00

0.05

0.10
Time / s

0.15

0.20

Fig. 15. Raw and normalised ltered data plots for test rails #8 at 32 km/h.

7. Conclusions
High-speed ACFM inspection tests were carried out using a
micro-pencil ACFM probe that was driven by a TSC Amigo crack
microgauge system. Tests were carried out initially using a test
piece containing spark-eroded notches which were 2 and 4 mm

deep. A turning lathe was used to rotate the rotary test piece at
speeds up to 121.5 km/h (at 3000 rpm). This experimental
conguration provided controlled inspection conditions as well
as easy repeatability of the tests. It was found that the probe could
successfully detect the induced notches at 121.5 km/h and that the
ACFM signal remained largely unaffected by the increases in

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.Ph. Papaelias et al. / NDT&E International 42 (2009) 328335

speed under constant lift-off. Tests using different lift-offs

indicated that the intensity of the signal obtained for a given
notch was reduced by the square as the lift-off increased as
expected. The main purpose of these tests was to assess the
capability of detection of the ACFM system at very high speeds.
However, the results obtained showed that a clearly stronger
signal was obtained for the 4 mm slots than for the 2 mm ones
regardless of the lift-off used.
In order to simulate actual rail inspection conditions at high
speed, further tests were carried out using the spinning rail rig at
the University of Birmingham. The ACFM micro-pencil probe was
installed on a special trolley, however, under this experimental
conguration it was impossible to compensate for lift-off variations that occurred during the spinning rail rig tests due to the
limitations in the design of the trolley used. Analysis of the results
obtained, showed that the ACFM sensor detected the vast majority
of the induced notches, missing only the smaller pocket-shaped
defects in rail #7. It was also found that the variations in the liftoff made it impossible to obtain correct rankings for all the
detected defects. Comparison of the ACFM data at various
inspections speeds showed that the signal remained largely
unaffected with increasing velocity up to 32 km/h. Unfortunately,
lift-off variations during the experiments did not permit a more
accurate evaluation of the capability of the ACFM micro-pencil
probe. However, the implications that arise from the fact that
there is virtually no loss of signal with increasing speed is
extremely important for the application of ACFM technology as an
alternative means of high-speed inspection of rails. The performance of the ACFM technique at inspection speeds up to 80 km/h
and constant lift-off is currently under investigation using a new
trolley design.

Acknowledgements
The provision of facilities and funding by the Centre for Rail
Research and Education and the School of Engineering at the
University of Birmingham is gratefully acknowledged. The authors
also wish to express their gratitude to TSC Inspections Systems
Ltd. for the provision of the ACFM equipment. Finally, the authors
would like to thank Dr Y. Fan at the Physics Department of
Warwick University for designing the trolley for the rig experiments and Mr Warren Hay and Mr Andy Dunn for their kind
assistance during testing.
References
[1] Ireland RC, Torres CR. Limitations of the circumferential MFL technique in the
NDE of pipelines. In: Proceedings of magnetics on non-destructive testing
Seminar. London, UK, April, 2005.

335

[2] Mandayam S, Udpa L, Udpa SS, Lord W. Invariance transformations for

magnetic ux leakage signals. IEEE Trans Magn 1996;32(3):157780.
[3] Li Y, Tian GY, Ward S. Numerical simulation on magnetic ux leakage
evaluation at high speed. NDT & E Int 2006;39:36773.
[4] Clark R. Rail aw detection: overview and needs for future developments.
NDT & E Int 2004;37:1118.
[5] Pohl R, Krull R, Meierhofer R. A new eddy current instrument in a grinding
train. In: Proceedings of ECNDT 2006. Berlin, Germany, 2006.
[6] Thomas HM, Junger M, Hintze H. Krull R, Ruhe S. Pioneering inspection of
railroad rails with eddy currents. In: Proceedings of the 15th World
Conference on Non-destructive Testing. Rome, Italy, 2000.
[7] Pohl R, Erhard A, Montag H-J, Thomas H-M, Wustenberg H. NDT techniques
for railroad wheel and gauge corner inspection. NDT & E Int 2004;37:8994.
[8] Junger M, Thomas H-M, Krull R, Ruhe S. The potential of eddy current
technology regarding railroad inspection and its implementation. In: the
Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Non-destructive Testing,
Montreal, Canada, August-September 2004.
[9] Thomas H-M, Heckel T, Hanspach G. Advantage of a combined ultrasonic and
eddy current examination for railway inspection trains. In: the Proceedings of
ECNDT 2006, Berlin, Germany, 2006.
[10] Howitt M. Bombardier brings ACFM into the rail industry. Insight 2002;44(6).
[11] Lewis AM, Michael DH, Lugg MC, Collins R. Thin-skin electromagnetic elds
around surface-breaking. J Appl Phys 1988;64(8):377784.
[12] Beissner RE, Teller CM, Burkhardt GL, Smith RT, Barton JR. Detection and
analysis of electric current perturbation caused by defects. ASTM STP
1981;722.
[13] Teller CM, Burkhardt GL. Small defect characterisation by the electric current
perturbation method. In: Proceedings of the 13th Symposium of NDE, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, 1981.
[14] Dobmann G, Persch H, Walle G, Coehne U. Objective magnetic pseudo-crack
indications in nuclear power plants. In: Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on NDE in Nuclear Industry (Deutch Gesellshaft fur Zerstorungsfreie Prufung), Berlin, 1981.
[15] Walle G, Dobmann G. A model for interpretation of A.C. magnetic stray ux
measurements. In: Holler P, editor. New procedures in NDT. Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York, Tokyo: Springer; 1983.
[16] Dobmann G. Defect detection and sizing by eddy-current imaging with
electric-current-perturbation (ECM) method. In: Proceedings of the third
European Conference on Nondestructive testing, Florence, Italy, 1518
October, 1984.
[17] Dover WD, Collins R, Michael DH. The use of AC-eld measurements for crack
detection and sizing in air and underwater. Philos Trans R Soc London
1986;320A:27183.
[18] Lugg MC, Collins R. In: Emerson PJ, Oates G, Editor. Proc 21st Ann Br Conf Nondestructive Testing. p. 533540, 1986.
[19] Lugg MC, Shang HM, Collins R, Michael DH. The measurement of surface crack
inclination in metals using AC electric elds. J Phys D: Appl Phys
1988;21:181421.
[20] Topp D, Smith M. Application of the ACFM inspection method to rail and rail
vehicles. In: the Proceedings of ENCDT 2005.
[21] Lugg M, Topp D. Recent developments and applications of the ACFM
inspection method and ACSM stress measurement method. In: Proceedings
of ECNDT 2006, Berlin, Germany, 2006.
[22] Papaelias MPh, Lugg M, Smith M, Roberts C, Davis CL. Detection and
quantication of rolling contact fatigue cracks in rails using ACFM
technology. In: Proceedings of the BINDT 2007 Conference, Glasgow, UK,
2007.
[23] TSC Inspection Systems, ACFM Crack Microgauge AMIGO Model User guide,
2001.
[24] Garnham JE, Franklin FJ, Fletcher DI, Kapoor A, Davis CL. Predicting the life of
steel rails. Proc ImechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2007;221(1):4558
(Special Issue).
[25] Eden HC, Garnham JE, Davis CL. Inuential microstructural changes on rolling
contact fatigue initiation in pearlitic rail steels. Mater Sci Technol
2007;21(6):6239.