Confusing on permeability and relative permeability

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of permeability and relative permeability in electromagnetism, particularly the relationship between the magnetic field \(\vec{B}\) and the magnetizing field \(\vec{H}\). Participants explore the definitions, implications, and applications of these terms, as well as their roles in linear media and magnetization.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the definition of relative permeability, suggesting it indicates the capability of a material to affect the magnetic field compared to free space, and asks if \(\mu\) represents the total permeability.
  • Another participant explains that \(\vec{H}\) is often more easily controlled and useful in practical applications, and that it behaves better in the presence of matter, where magnetization is relevant.
  • There is a clarification that in linear media, the relationship \(\vec{B} = \mu \vec{H}\) holds, with \(\mu\) being the total permeability of the material, and that relative permeability \(\mu_r\) is dimensionless.
  • One participant seeks confirmation on whether \(\mu\) refers to total permeability and if it can be expressed as \(\mu = \mu_r \mu_0\).
  • A later reply confirms that \(\mu\) refers specifically to the permeability of the material.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the definitions and roles of \(\vec{B}\), \(\vec{H}\), and permeability. There is no consensus on the implications of these concepts, and multiple views on their application and significance remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the relationships between \(\vec{B}\), \(\vec{H}\), and magnetization without resolving the complexities of these interactions or the assumptions underlying their definitions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals in physics and engineering who are exploring the concepts of electromagnetism, particularly in relation to magnetic fields and materials.

KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
In some textbook of fundamental electromagnetism, the relation between magnetic field [tex]\vec{B}[/tex] and so called magnetizing field [tex]\vec{H}[/tex] is

[tex]\vec{B} = \mu_0\vec{H}[/tex]

But later on, they introduce a so called relative permeability

[tex]\mu_r = \frac{\mu}{\mu_0}[/tex]

I might be wrong but my understanding of this definition is relative permeability is used to tell the 'capability to affect the field' of the object while comparing to something in free space? So [tex]\mu[/tex] is actually the total and absolute permeability of that object?

And I am quite confusing with [tex]\vec{H}[/tex] here. Now then we have the [tex]\vec{B}[/tex] to describe the magnetic field, why we need another field variable? Someone said it may related to magnetization. But if there is a magnetization so

[tex]\vec{B} = \mu_0(\vec{H} + \vec{M}) = \mu_0\vec{H}[/tex]

why we still have to use H ?

My last question is: if a material with relative permeability [tex]\mu_r=\mu / \mu_0[/tex] is considered, the relation between B and H will modified to

[tex]\vec{B} = \mu_r\vec{H}[/tex]

or

[tex]\vec{B}=\mu\vec{H}[/tex]

or

unchanged?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Often, H is much more easily controlled, so H is much more useful both for practical purposes and in calculations. In fact, quite often H is introduced before B.

H behaves much more nicely in the presence of matter, where the magnetization is not in general zero. It's a similar relationship between E and D, but in practice it is E that is more easily controlled.

In linear media, B = μH. The relative permeability μr is dimensionless, so the dimensions wouldn't work out if you used that instead.

The magnetic susceptibility χm (which is dimensionless) determines the magnetization in (linear) matter: M = χmH. Thus B = μ0(H + M) = μ0(1 + χm)H = μH, where μ is defined to be μ0(1 + χm). And then μr = μ / μ0 = 1 + χm.
 
Thank you so much. In your reply, you said: In linear media, B = μH ... I wonder if μ here is the total permeability? That is, μ=μr0 ?

adriank said:
Often, H is much more easily controlled, so H is much more useful both for practical purposes and in calculations. In fact, quite often H is introduced before B.

H behaves much more nicely in the presence of matter, where the magnetization is not in general zero. It's a similar relationship between E and D, but in practice it is E that is more easily controlled.

In linear media, B = μH. The relative permeability μr is dimensionless, so the dimensions wouldn't work out if you used that instead.

The magnetic susceptibility χm (which is dimensionless) determines the magnetization in (linear) matter: M = χmH. Thus B = μ0(H + M) = μ0(1 + χm)H = μH, where μ is defined to be μ0(1 + χm). And then μr = μ / μ0 = 1 + χm.
 
By μ I mean exactly μ, the permeability of the material.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
28K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K