Magnetic Field Question (saturating an iron plate)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the magnetic field behavior within a ferromagnetic iron plate, emphasizing the interplay between the demagnetizing field and the applied field. It establishes that the internal magnetic field (B) approximates the applied field (H₀) due to continuous flux lines, despite the effective magnetic field (H) being nearly zero inside the material. The analysis reveals that for large magnetic susceptibility (χ), the total magnetic field (H_total) approaches zero, while the magnetization (M) can be calculated using the formula M = χH₀ / (1 + 4πχ). This indicates that the iron plate exhibits slow magnetization in response to the applied field.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of magnetic fields and their components (B, H, M)
  • Familiarity with ferromagnetic materials and their properties
  • Knowledge of magnetic susceptibility (χ) and its implications
  • Basic grasp of electromagnetic theory and equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the effects of demagnetizing fields on ferromagnetic materials
  • Explore the relationship between magnetic susceptibility and magnetization
  • Investigate the linearity assumptions in magnetic material behavior
  • Learn about the practical applications of magnetic field calculations in engineering
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, materials scientists, and anyone involved in the study or application of magnetic materials and fields.

lcvoth23
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
How strong a magnetic field is necessary to magnetize an iron plate to its saturation magnetization for a field applied normal to the plate surface? Assume that iron has a relative permeability 200 and a saturation magnetization of 1700 emu/cm^3. If the field is applied in the plane of the plate, how large a field is required?
Relevant Equations
B = H + 4*pi*M
H (total) = Hd + H (applied)
I know that the field inside sample is a combination of the demagnetizing field and whatever applied field you may have. So these two fields together influence how big a field you need in order to magnetize the sample.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With a plate geometry, the ## B ## field inside the material is approximately the applied field (## B=H_o ##) because the lines of flux for ## B ## are continuous. Even though ## H ## is effectively zero inside the material of the plate, (because of the demagnetizing field), I think in calculations like this one, you need to assume that the effective ## H ## in the material is the applied ## B ##, even though it really is a bit of hand waving to make such an assumption. It is a very interesting problem, but I think it also brings to light some discrepancies that arise when working with ferromagnetic materials, and the assumption that these materials behave linearly. Anyway, I think what I have proposed above is about the best you can do with such a problem. @vanhees71 Might you have an input here?
 
Last edited:
A follow-on: I put some more effort into this one, and I believe I got a result that makes sense.
For very large ## \chi ##, ## H_{total} \approx 0 ##, but more precisely ## H_{total}=H_o+H_D ##, where ## H_D=-4 \pi M ##. Since ## M=\chi H_{total}=\chi (H_o-4 \pi M) ##, we get ## M=\frac{\chi H_o}{1+4 \pi \chi} ##. ## \\ ## For large ## \chi ##, ## M \approx \frac{H_o}{4 \pi} ##.
Since ## B=H_{total}+4 \pi M ##, we see for large ## \chi ## that ## H_{total} \approx 0 ## , and ## B \approx H_o ##.
One other item, is they give you ## \mu=200=1+4 \pi \chi ##, so from this you can compute ## \chi ##. ## \\ ## It appears this one does not suffer from the linearity difficulty that I originally thought. ## \\ ## For this latest result, ## H_{total}=\frac{H_o}{1+4 \pi \chi} ##. This result is much different from what I proposed in post 2, and it suggests that the iron in the plate will be very slow to develop a magnetization in response to the applied field ## H_o ##. Whether this actually happens in practice, I'm not completely sure.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K