Cylinder with uniform magnetization

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the divergence of magnetization (M) in a short circular cylinder with uniform magnetization parallel to its axis. The initial conclusion that ∇·M = 0 is challenged by the observation that this result does not hold at the boundary of the cylinder, where a discontinuity in magnetization occurs. The correct interpretation involves applying the macroscopic Maxwell equations for magnetostatics, specifically noting that the divergence of M does not vanish at the boundary, leading to the boundary condition for the magnetic field (B) and magnetic field intensity (H). The reference to Sommerfeld's "Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vol. 3" provides additional context for solving this problem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of macroscopic Maxwell equations for magnetostatics
  • Familiarity with cylindrical coordinates in vector calculus
  • Knowledge of magnetic fields and magnetization concepts
  • Experience with boundary conditions in electromagnetic theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of the divergence theorem in cylindrical coordinates
  • Learn about the scalar magnetic potential and its role in magnetostatics
  • Explore the Green's function method for solving Laplace's equation
  • Review Sommerfeld's "Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vol. 3" for in-depth understanding
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism, particularly those focused on magnetostatics and boundary conditions in magnetic fields.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
A short circular cylinder carries a uniform magnetization M parallel to its axis.
I want to know what the divergence of M is. Using divergence in cylindrical coordinates I get that ∇[itex]\bullet[/itex]M = 0.

Now I was pretty sure of this result until I read the following in my book:

"∇[itex]\bullet[/itex]H = -∇[itex]\bullet[/itex]M only when the divergence of M vanishes. If you think I'm being pedantic consider the example of a bar magnet - a short cylinder of iron that carries a permanent uniform magnetization M parallel to its axis. In this case there is no free current anywhere, which can lead you to use the above formula. This is however not correct since the divergence of M does not vanish."

This is obviously in disagreement with what I found for the short cylinder - can anyone explain what is wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's start from the macroscopic Maxwell equations for magnetostatics. You always have (in Heaviside Lorentz units)

[tex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B}=0, \quad \vec{\nabla} \times \vec{H}=\vec{j}.\qquad (1)[/tex]

In our case we have [itex]\vec{j}=0[/itex]. The connection between [itex]\vec{B}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{H}[/itex] is given by

[tex]\vec{B}=\vec{H}+\vec{M}. \qquad (2)[/tex]

In your case you have

[tex]\vec{M}=\begin{cases}<br /> \vec{M}_0=\text{const} & \text{inside the cylinder}\\<br /> 0 & \text{outside the cylinder}<br /> \end{cases}[/tex]

From (1) and (2) you indeed get

[tex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{H}=-\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{M}=0[/tex]

inside the cylinder and outside the cylinder. However you have a discontinuity of the magnetization at the boundary of the cylinder. Thus, at the boundary you have to translate the source freeness of [itex]\vec{B}[/itex] to the integral form, leading to the boundary condition

[tex]\vec{n} \cdot (\vec{B}_{>}-\vec{B}_{<} )=0[/tex]

along the surface of the cylinder. Here [itex]\vec{n}[/itex] is the usual surface-normal vector pointing out of the cylinder, and [itex]\vec{B}_{>}[/itex] ([itex]\vec{B}_{<}[/itex]) is the limit of the field when going to the cylinder surface from outside (from inside).

For [itex]\vec{H}[/itex], using (2) you get

[tex]\vec{n} \cdot (\vec{H}_{>}-\vec{H}_{<} )=-\vec{n} \cdot (\vec{M}_{>}-\vec{M}_{<})=+\vec{n} \cdot \vec{M}_0.[/tex]

Now you can solve for [itex]\vec{H}[/itex] using the scalar magnetic potential and using the Green's function of the Laplace opertor.

A very good discussion of this problem can be found in

Sommerfeld, Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vol. 3.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K