Superconducting field inhibits radiation heat transfer?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the claim that superconducting magnets can shield objects from radiation heat transfer, particularly in MRI machines. Participants argue that while superconductors can block electromagnetic interference, they do not effectively prevent thermal radiation, which primarily comes from neighboring surfaces. The cooling fluid, typically liquid helium, plays a crucial role in maintaining low temperatures for superconductivity, rather than the magnetic field itself providing insulation. The consensus is that thermal radiation cannot be significantly reduced by a magnetic field, and effective thermal insulation requires proper shielding techniques. Overall, the assertion that a magnetic field can block thermal radiation is viewed as flawed.
Q_Goest
Science Advisor
Messages
3,012
Reaction score
42
I'm reviewing a letter regarding the sheilding of an object using a superconducting magnet as is commonly found in MRI machines. The claim is that the magnetic field created by superconducting windings (wire which is carrying a current and thus creating a magnetic field) and wrapped around an object will prevent radiation heat transfer to the object. It actually says the magnetic field will shield the object from electromagnetic energy including thermal energy and infrared radiation. This winding is thus supposed to shield the object from thermal radiation heat transfer from the environment.

What do you think? Is there any reason to believe a strong magnetic field created by superconducting windings should block radiation heat transfer?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
maybe it is not the magnetic field that is insulating the object..
maybe it is the fluid that is super cooling the superconductor..
question , what kind of resistane can be achieved in the superconducting coil?
can you post some specs of this device ..i am very interrested
 
The only way to prevent radiation heating is to have insulating shields, which should have the same temperature as an object. Normally the supeconducting magnets are cooled by liquid helium. So, if you have an outside walls at the 4.2K, the radiation heat transfer TO the object will be greatly reduced.

It seems that the author of the letter somehow mistake thermal radiation and electromagnetic interference. It is true, that any thick enough metallic layer can provide electromagnetic shielding, and superconductors are kind of perfectEMI shields, though not ideal. But the thermal radiation comes not from outside but from the neighboring surfaces, thus if we surround the object by a high temperature superconductor, we can greatly reduce the interference, but we still have a strong thermal radiation.

Finally, magnetic field has nothing to do with thermal radition, at least on achivable scale.
 
willib

Thanks for the reply, and also apologize for being a bit obtuse here. Unfortunately I'm not at liberty to explain some details.

maybe it is not the magnetic field that is insulating the object..
maybe it is the fluid that is super cooling the superconductor..

The superconducting windings are at a temperature suitable for superconductivity, ie: less than 40 Kelvin. There is a vacuum space and thermal shielding (multi-layer insulation) around these coils to minimize heat transfer from the environment, but there is also an object inside the coils at a temperature equal to the temperature of the windings. Coils like this are typically immersed in liquid helium which acts as a thermal mass so that they stay cold. The helium is recondensed or replaced depending on the technology employed.

what kind of resistane can be achieved in the superconducting coil?

Typical superconducting wires like these handle hundreds of amps with zero resistance. The current is initiated using a power source and a superconducting switch then changes the current source from an external source, and allows the current to come right back to it's starting point all within the magnet so the windings and switch are all superconducting. Since there is no resistance, the current (hundreds of amps) continues to flow essentially forever without additional power.
 
shyboy

magnetic field has nothing to do with thermal radition, at least on achivable scale.

Yes, I'd agree, but because of the source, I had to ask - I wasn't absolutely sure. I can't understand how anyone can suggest that thermal radiation is blocked or even significantly reduced by the magnetic field created but I'm not a real expert at this.

I'd just like to ensure that when I open my big mouth to suggest that this paper is off the wall with it's contention that thermal radiation is somehow blocked or reduced by the magnetic field, I don't find my foot in there!
 
Q_Goest said:
Typical superconducting wires like these handle hundreds of amps with zero resistance. The current is initiated using a power source and a superconducting switch then changes the current source from an external source, and allows the current to come right back to it's starting point all within the magnet so the windings and switch are all superconducting. Since there is no resistance, the current (hundreds of amps) continues to flow essentially forever without additional power.
that is sooo cool , literally !
 
Hi all I have some confusion about piezoelectrical sensors combination. If i have three acoustic piezoelectrical sensors (with same receive sensitivity in dB ref V/1uPa) placed at specific distance, these sensors receive acoustic signal from a sound source placed at far field distance (Plane Wave) and from broadside. I receive output of these sensors through individual preamplifiers, add them through hardware like summer circuit adder or in software after digitization and in this way got an...
I am not an electrical engineering student, but a lowly apprentice electrician. I learn both on the job and also take classes for my apprenticeship. I recently wired my first transformer and I understand that the neutral and ground are bonded together in the transformer or in the service. What I don't understand is, if the neutral is a current carrying conductor, which is then bonded to the ground conductor, why does current only flow back to its source and not on the ground path...
I have recently moved into a new (rather ancient) house and had a few trips of my Residual Current breaker. I dug out my old Socket tester which tell me the three pins are correct. But then the Red warning light tells me my socket(s) fail the loop test. I never had this before but my last house had an overhead supply with no Earth from the company. The tester said "get this checked" and the man said the (high but not ridiculous) earth resistance was acceptable. I stuck a new copper earth...
Back
Top