ARTICLE IN PRESS

NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48

www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

Thickness measurement of non-magnetic plates using multi-frequency

eddy current sensors
W. Yin, A.J. Peyton
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, The University of Manchester, Manchester M60 1QD, UK
Received 8 March 2006; received in revised form 20 June 2006; accepted 16 July 2006
Available online 18 September 2006

Abstract

A robust feature in multi-frequency eddy current (MEC) testing has been found that can be directly linked to the thickness of the plate
under test. It is shown mathematically that the peak frequency of the imaginary part of the inductance change when an air-cored coil is
placed next to a non-magnetic metallic plate is inversely proportional to the thickness of the plate for a given material. Experimental
results indicate that this relationship also holds for a ferrite-cored U-shaped coil. In addition, this peak frequency has been shown to be
relatively independent of lift-off variations. Use of this new feature provides a fast and accurate method to gauge the thickness of plates.
Measurements made for a sample air-cored and ferrite U-cored coil next to copper and aluminium plates of various thicknesses verified
the proposed method.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Multi-frequency; Eddy current; Thickness; Peak frequency

1. Introduction
Eddy current methods have been used in a range of
technological applications such as thickness measurement,
quality inspection, coating and surface treatment [1–5].
Both single-frequency eddy current techniques, where the
coil is excited with a sinusoidal signal, and pulsed eddy
current (PEC) techniques [6–10], where the coil is excited
with a rectangular stimulus have been developed. The PEC
technique, as a time domain method, contains frequency-
rich information and shows promising results in detecting
flaws in greater depth. Three features, namely the time to
peak, the peak height and more recently reported the rising
time [11] of the PEC signal, are used in PEC testing to
identify and characterise defects in metallic targets.
However, both single frequency and pulse eddy current
testing can suffer from errors due to variations in the
distance between the sensor and the test piece, known as
lift-off effects.
Recently, the potential of using multi-frequency eddy
current (MEC) sensors for non-destructive testing applica-
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 161 3064808; fax: +44 161 3064789.
E-mail address: wuliang.yin@manchester.ac.uk (W. Yin).
tions has been explored. For example, the use of multi-
frequency methods in abstracting conductivity and perme-
ability profiles along the depth in metal structures has been
shown [12–14]. The potential of using MEC sensors in non-
contact microstructure monitoring in steel production has
also been demonstrated [15,16]. Analytical and numerical
solutions for a variety of different sensor geometries have
been published. From these models, it is possible to
determine and significantly reduce the lift-off effects [17].
In most of these methods, theoretical impedance values
were computed using numerical or analytical solutions for
a variety of possible combination of the parameter values,
a set of parameters for which the theoretical data were
close as possible to the experimental data were chosen. This
usually involves a simplex search method. For a large
number of parameter values, the search process was much
greater than the time required for the measurements. A
feature-based inversion method for conductivity and
thickness measurement greatly reduced the time [18].
However, these features are still coupled together and
therefore a multi-dimensional look-up table has to be
constructed to inverse the parameters.
In this paper, a robust feature has been found in MEC
testing, which has clear physical explanations; can be

0963-8695/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2006.07.009
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
44 W. Yin, A.J. Peyton / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48

approximated from analytical equations; and is verified by

simulations and experiments. Previous studies normally
focused on the real part of the inductance (i.e. imaginary
part of the impedance) of the sensor signal, while this paper
has found that the peak frequency of the imaginary part of
the inductance change when an eddy current sensor is
placed next to a non-magnetic metallic plate is inversely
proportional to the thickness for a given material, and that
this peak frequency is relatively unaffected by the lift-off
variations. This feature is ideal for on-line thickness
gauging where lift-off variation is inevitable and the
method could be extended to defect identification and
classification.

2. The peak frequency feature

In this section, the peak frequency feature will be

derived, explained and verified using mathematical, physi-
cal and experimental approaches. First, the analytical
solution of Dodd and Deeds [19] will be reviewed. Second,
the two limiting cases for DL(o) with o ¼ 0 and N will be
considered with a physical explanation of the results. Fig. 1. (a) The schematic diagram of the model; (b) the geometry of the
Further, the simulated and measured results will be coil.
displayed. Finally, the peak frequency will be derived from
the analytical solution. Thickness measurement results will m0 denotes the permeability of free space. N denotes the
be given in Section 3. number of turns in the coil; r1 and r2 denote the inner and
outer radii of the coil; while l1 and l2 denote the height of
the bottom and top of the coil; and c denotes the thickness
2.1. Analytical solution for an air coil above a conducting of the plate.
plate
2.2. DL(o) in two limiting cases o ¼ 0 and N
For an air-core coil, the general analytical solution for
inductance change caused by a layer of non-magnetic Setting o ¼ 0 gives the inductance change for zero
metallic plate was described by Dodd and Deeds [19]. The frequency. The real part of the inductance change is zero,
difference in the complex inductance is which means the non-magnetic plate causes no inductance
DLðoÞ ¼ LðoÞ
LA ðoÞ, where the coil inductance above change and the magnetic flux penetrates the plate as in free
a plate is L(o), and LA(o) is the inductance in free space. space. Since the static magnetic field does not induce eddy
Fig. 1 is a schematic diagram of the model. currents, the imaginary part of the inductance is zero as well.
The formulas of Dodd and Deeds are: In the limit of an arbitrary large frequency, the
Z 1 2 inductance
P ðaÞ R change is given by DL ¼
DL0, where
DLðoÞ ¼ K AðaÞfðaÞ da, (1) DL0 ¼ K ðP2 ðaÞ=a6 ÞAðaÞ da, which is independent of the
0 a6
thickness and conductivity of the plate. Physically, this
where corresponds to the situation that the incident magnetic flux
is totally excluded from the plate.
ða1 þ aÞða1
aÞ
ða1 þ aÞða1
aÞe2a1 c
fðaÞ ¼ , (2) The fact that in both cases o ¼ 0 and N, the imaginary

ða1
aÞða1
aÞ þ ða1 þ aÞða1 þ aÞe2a1 c part of the inductance is zero indicates that the energy loss
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi due to the eddy current effect is non-existent in the metal
a1 ¼ a2 þ josm0 , (3) plate at these frequencies. However, it is known that at
frequencies between these two limiting cases, eddy currents do
pm0 N 2 exist. It is therefore deduced that the heat loss due to eddy
K¼ , (4) currents must have a peak in between o ¼ 0 and N, which
ðl 1
l 2 Þ2 ðr1
r2 Þ2 should be reflected in the imaginary part of the inductance.
Z ar2
PðaÞ ¼ xJ 1 ðxÞ dx, (5) 2.3. Simulations and experiments
ar1

The frequency-dependent inductance change for a coil

AðaÞ ¼ ðe
al 1
e
al 2 Þ, (6) defined by r1 ¼ 20 mm, r2 ¼ 20.1 mm, h ¼ 2 mm and
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Yin, A.J. Peyton / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48 45

Fig. 2. The imaginary parts of DL0 for copper plates with thickness 22, 44, y, 22  6 mm (simulation results).

Fig. 3. The imaginary parts of DL0 for aluminium plates with thickness 22, 44, y, 22  6 mm (simulation results).

N ¼ 10 was calculated using Eqs. (1)–(6) and is plotted in

Fig. 2. The conductivity of the plate was chosen to be
5.8  107 (copper) and thickness was chosen to be 22,
22  2, y , 22  6 mm. The lift-off was chosen to be 1 mm.
On examination of Fig. 2, Im (DL0) peaks at a frequency
op, which is seen to increase as thickness decreases. On
trials over a range of conductivities and thickness, it was
found that this common feature also holds for plates with
different conductivity (e.g. 3.82  107 O for aluminium) and
different thickness (22, 22  2, y, 22  6 mm) (see Fig. 3),
which was also later verified by experimental results. Note
that the group of curves in Fig. 3 shifts slightly in relation
to those in Fig. 2 due to the conductivity of aluminium is
less than that of the copper. To examine the robustness of
the feature, much thicker aluminium plates (1–5 mm) were
also tested using a ferrite-cored U-shaped sensor. The
results will be presented in Section 3. The ferrite-cored
sensor, shown in Fig. 4 is defined by pole distance Fig. 4. The geometry of the ferrite-cored U-shaped sensor.
w ¼ 2.2 cm, height h ¼ 1 cm, with a square pole of
l  l ¼ 5  5 mm. The number of the turns for the coil is 15.
This approximation only holds for small value of a1c. As
2.4. Derivation of the peak frequency from the analytic a increases, the error due to this approximation becomes
solution large for Eq. (7). However, the term a6 in the denominator
(Eq. (1)) may limit its contribution to the final inductance
Two approximations can be used to derive the peak results.
frequency from the analytic solution. The next approximation originates from the fact that
Substituting e2a1 c with 1 þ 2a1 c, and considering Eq. (3), f(a) varies slowly with a compared to the rest of the
Eq. (2) becomes integrand, which reaches its maximum at a characteristic
spatial frequency a0. The parameter a0 is defined to
josm0 c be one over the smallest dimension of the coil. The
fðaÞ  . (7)
josm0 c þ 2a2 c þ 2a þ 2aa1 c approximation is to evaluate f(a) at a0 and take it outside
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
46 W. Yin, A.J. Peyton / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48

of the integral: Further, it was found that Eq. (11) can be approximated
by
DLðoÞ ¼ fða0 ÞDL0 . (8)
  rffiffiffiffiffiffi
o o o
Letting o0 ¼ ð2a20 c þ 2a0 Þ=sm0 c, Eq. (7) can be expressed fða0 Þ ¼ j 1þj þ 0:15j . (12)
as o0 o0 o0

jo=o0 Note that 0.15 in Eq. (12) is an empirical coefficient

fðaÞ ¼ . (9) obtained via trials. Physically, Eq. (12) indicates that a
jo=o0 þ 1 þ 2a0 a1 c þ ð2a20 c þ 2a0 Þ
metal plate serves as an approximate first-order low pass
Noticing that a0 c51 is well satisfied when the coil filter to the magnetic flux. Note also that the frequency op
diameter is much larger than the plate thickness, we have at which the imaginary part in Eq. (12) peaks is not exactly
o0. However, a relation can be found to link op and o0,
2a0
o0 ¼ , (10) i.e., opE1.047  o0. Therefore, a simple relationship exists
sm0 c between the thickness c and op, i.e., c  op ¼ const. It can
be concluded that the peak angular frequency increases if
jo=o0 the thickness becomes smaller, which agrees with observa-
fða0 Þ ¼ . (11)
jo=o0 þ 1 þ a1 c tions.

Fig. 5. The imaginary parts of DL0 for aluminium plates with thickness 1–5 mm (experimental results).

Fig. 6. The peak frequency at different lift-offs for aluminium plates of thickness 3 mm.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Yin, A.J. Peyton / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48 47

3. Results and discussion
To examine the robustness of the feature, much thicker
aluminium plates (1–5 mm) were tested using a ferrite-
cored U-shaped sensor with the results shown in Fig. 5. As
expected, the peak frequency decreases as the thickness of
the plate increases.
Experiments were also performed with both the ferrite-
cored U-shaped sensor and the air-cored sensor to examine
the robustness of the peak frequency feature in relation to
lift-off variations. It has been found that with the increase
of the lift-off, the magnitude of signal decreases, but the
peak frequency remains virtually constant. Fig. 6 gives an
example for the ferrite-cored U-shaped coil above an
aluminium plate of 3 mm thickness at lift-off 0.0, 0.5 and
1 mm.
The constant in equation c  op ¼ const, which is
dependent on sensor geometry, can be obtained through
calibration. Once the constant is determined, the thickness
Table 1
Actual and measured thickness for copper foils
Plate Actual Measured Relative error
thickness (mm) thickness (%)
can be easily calculated. Two experiments were performed,
one using air-cored coil for thin copper foils and one using
ferrite U-cored coil for thicker aluminium plates.
Thicknesses inferred from a number of measurements
are given in Tables 1 and 2, which are in good agreement
with the real thicknesses with the maximum relative error
less than 3%. The difference between the actual value and
inferred value is due to the approximate nature of the
relationship and the error caused by the estimation of peak
Im DL0 and op from measurements at a finite number of
frequency points.
The error caused by conductivity deviations can be
estimated using Eq. (10). The first-order approximation of
the error due to conductivity variations can be expressed as
ðDs=sÞ ¼
ðDc=cÞ. The error in thickness measurement
due to lift-off variations has been found to be within in
0.5%. Fig. 7 shows an example for the case of the 3 mm
thickness aluminium plate at lift-offs 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8
and 1 mm.
The significance in using such a simplified relationship is
that it only requires simple calculation, which may
facilitate the realisation of this method in small portable
instruments using for example micro-controllers with
limited memory and computation power.

Copper 22 22.09 0.40 4. Conclusions

44 45.1 2.5
66 67.24 1.89 Based on the described feature and the measurement
88 90.42 2.75 method, it is possible to realise a small portable measuring
110 108.19
1.65
132 128.56
2.61
instrument that is capable of providing real-time thickness
measurements, which are immune to lift-off variations. In
this study, a Solartron SL1260 impedance analyser work-
Table 2 ing in a swept frequency mode was used to acquire the
Actual and measured thickness for aluminium plates multi-frequency data. However, multi-frequency impe-
dances can be abstracted simultaneously using composite
Plate Actual Measured Relative error multi-sine waveform excitation followed by FFT opera-
thickness (mm) thickness (mm) (%)
tions. A prototype instrument of this kind is being
Aluminium 1 0.996
0.37 developed in authors’ laboratory [20]. Pulsed excitation
2 1.989
0.53 can be regarded as a special case of composite multi-
3 2.955
1.48 frequency excitation.
4 4.023 0.59
5 5.071 1.41
Future work will involve thickness measurement using
feature-based method from MEC sensor response for

Fig. 7. Relative error in thickness measurement at different lift-offs.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
48 W. Yin, A.J. Peyton / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 43–48
magnetic plates. The field performance of the sensor will be
evaluated.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the UK Engineering
and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for its
financial support of this research. And we thank the
reviewer for his helpful comments.
References
[1] Takagi T, Miya K. ECT round-robin test for steam generator tube. J
Jpn Soc Appl Electromagn Mech 2000;8:121–8.
[2] Moulder J, Uzal CE, Rose JH. Thickness and conductivity of metallic
layers from eddy current measurements. Rev Sci Instrum
1992;63:3455–65.
[3] Nonaka Y. A double coil method for simultaneously measuring the
resistivity, permeability, and thickness of a moving metal sheet. IEEE
Trans Instrum Meas 1996;45:478–82.
[4] Placko D, Clergeot H, Santander E. Physical modelling of an eddy
current sensor designed for real time distance and thickness
measurement in galvanization industry. IEEE Trans Magn
1989;25:2861–3.
[5] Sethuraman A, Rose JH. Rapid inversion of eddy current data for
conductivity and thickness of metal coatings. J Nondestructive Eval
1995;14:39–46.
[6] Sophian A, Tian GY, Talyor D, Rudlin J. Design of a pulsed eddy
current sensor for detection of defects in aircraft lap-joints. Sensors
Actuators A: Phys 2002;101:92–8.
[7] Tai CC, Rose JH, Moulder JC. Thickness and conductivity of
metallic layers from pulsed eddy-current measurements. Rev Sci
Instrum 1996;67:3965–72.
[8] Tai CC, Rose JH, Moulder JC. Characterization of coatings on
magnetic metals using swept-frequency eddy current and transient
eddy current methods. Rev Progr Quant Nondestr Eval
1997;16:1593–600.
[9] Yang HC, Tai CC. Pulsed eddy-current measurement of a conducting
coating on a magnetic metal plate. Meas Sci Technol
2002;13:1259–65.
[10] Tian GY, Sophian A, Talyor D, Rudlin J. Multiple sensors on pulsed
eddy-current detection for 3-d subsurface crack assessment. IEEE
Sensors J 2005;5:90–6.
[11] Tian GY, Sophian A. Defect classification using a new feature for
pulsed eddy current sensors. NDT&E Int 2005;38:77–82.
[12] Yin W, Dickinson SJ, Peyton AJ. Imaging the continuous
conductivity profile within layered metal structures using inductance
spectroscopy. IEEE Sensors J 2005;5:161–6.
[13] Yin W, Dickinson SJ, Peyton AJ. Imaging the permeability
distribution of a layered conductor using inductance spectroscopy.
In: Proceedings of the 4th world congress on industrial process
tomography, Aizu, Japan, 2005. p. 1092–7.
[14] Sundararaghavan V. A multi-frequency eddy current inversion
method for characterising conductivity gradients on water jet peened
components. NDT&E Int 2005;38:541–7.
[15] Johnstone S, Binns R, Peyton AJ, Pritchard WDN. Using electro-
magnetic methods to monitor the transformation of steel samples.
Trans Inst Meas Control 2001;23:21–9.
[16] Dickinson SJ, Binns R, Yin W, Davis C, Peyton AJ. The
development of a multi-frequency electromagnetic instrument for
monitoring the phase transformation of hot strip steel. In: Proceed-
ings of IEEE IMTC, Ottawa, Canada, 2005. p. 1091–6.
[17] Yin W, Binns R, Dickinson SJ, Davis C, Peyton AJ. Analysis of the
lift-off effect of phase spectra for eddy current sensors. In:
Proceedings of IEEE IMTC, Ottawa, Canada, 2005. p. 1779–84.
[18] Sethuraman A, Rose JH. Rapid inversion of eddy current data for
conductivity and thickness of metal coatings. J Nondest Eval
1995;14:39–46.
[19] Dodd CV, Deeds WE. Analytical solutions to eddy-current probe-
coil problem. J Appl Phys 1968;39:2829–39.
[20] Yin W, Dickinson SJ, Peyton AJ. A multi-frequency impedance
analyzing instrument for eddy current testing. Meas Sci Technol
2006;17:393–402.