Magnetic field strength and magnetic flux

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of magnetic field strength (B) and magnetic flux, exploring their definitions, relationships, and the implications of their mathematical representations. Participants are examining the theoretical and conceptual aspects of these quantities, particularly in relation to their geometric interpretations and the conditions under which they are defined.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion over the definitions of magnetic field strength and magnetic flux, particularly regarding the necessity of taking the dot product with the area vector.
  • One participant suggests that magnetic field strength is defined as the flux through a unit area orthogonal to the field, implying that if the area is parallel to the flux, no flux lines will cross it.
  • Another participant argues that since flux is defined as field lines entering a surface at 90 degrees, it seems redundant to consider the orthogonal component of the magnetic field strength when calculating flux.
  • Some participants discuss the vector nature of magnetic field strength and the need to decompose it into components parallel and orthogonal to the area to compute flux accurately.
  • There is a reiteration that magnetic field strength is the flux per unit area, leading to questions about the necessity of resolving it into components.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of the orthogonal component in the definition of magnetic flux, indicating that multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding the geometric relationships between magnetic field strength and magnetic flux, but there are unresolved questions about the definitions and their implications in different orientations.

Jimmy87
Messages
692
Reaction score
19
Hi, please could someone help with my confusion over these two qauntities. In class we recently learned that magnetic field strength (B) is the number of flux lines (measured in Webers) per square metre. The magnetic flux on the other hand is the total number of flux lines (measured in Webers), hence the equation for magnetic flux is:

Magnetic flux = B A

What I don't quite get is why you need to take the dot product with the area vector. Flux is associated with something that penetrates a given surface. But magnetic field strength is webers/square metre therefore it is the number of flux lines per square metre. So don't flux lines by definition already penetrate a surface, hence flux lines per square metre already referes to a magnetic field that is penetrating a surface?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The field strength is the flux through a unit area orthogonal to the field itself. If the area is parallel to the flux, no flux lines will cross it.

Try the following (in 2D, it is difficult to draw in 3D):
- Draw evenly spaced flux lines on a paper.
- Draw a line of a certain length orthogonal to the flux lines, count the number of lines crossing the line.
- Now draw a line of the same length parallel to the flux lines, how many flux lines cross this line?
- Draw yet another line of the same length, this time in a 45 degree angle to the flux lines. How many flux lines cross this line?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Orodruin said:
The field strength is the flux through a unit area orthogonal to the field itself. If the area is parallel to the flux, no flux lines will cross it.

Try the following (in 2D, it is difficult to draw in 3D):
- Draw evenly spaced flux lines on a paper.
- Draw a line of a certain length orthogonal to the flux lines, count the number of lines crossing the line.
- Now draw a line of the same length parallel to the flux lines, how many flux lines cross this line?
- Draw yet another line of the same length, this time in a 45 degree angle to the flux lines. How many flux lines cross this line?

Thanks for your reply. Yeh that makes sense but the problem I have is that flux is defined as field lines that enter a surface at 90 degrees. Magnetic field strength (flux density) is the FLUX per unit area. Therefore, the field lines will already be at 90 degrees because you are talking about FLUX per unit area. Therefore, it makes not sense to me to take the quantity B which is orthogonal to the surface because it will already be orthogonal as its flux. It would make more sense to me if magnetic field strength is the number of field lines per unit area. Then flux would be the proportion of these field lines that are orthogonal to the area (or parallel to the area vector).
 
Jimmy87 said:
Thanks for your reply. Yeh that makes sense but the problem I have is that flux is defined as field lines that enter a surface at 90 degrees.

Well, this is more or less the point. The quantity ##\vec B## is a vector, when you define it as above you are defining the component of that vector in the normal direction of the surface. If you know ##\vec B## and want to compute the flux through a given area, you can decompose ##\vec B## in a component parallel to the area and another which is orthogonal to the area. The component parallel to the area will not contribute with any flux through the area, while the orthogonal component is just what you defined above. It is this decomposition that gives you the scalar product between the unit normal to the surface and the ##\vec B## field.
 
Orodruin said:
Well, this is more or less the point. The quantity ##\vec B## is a vector, when you define it as above you are defining the component of that vector in the normal direction of the surface. If you know ##\vec B## and want to compute the flux through a given area, you can decompose ##\vec B## in a component parallel to the area and another which is orthogonal to the area. The component parallel to the area will not contribute with any flux through the area, while the orthogonal component is just what you defined above. It is this decomposition that gives you the scalar product between the unit normal to the surface and the ##\vec B## field.


Thanks. Yeh I kind of get your point. The fact that magnetic field strength is the flux per unit area seems like there is no need to resolve it into a component parallel and orthogonal to the area because flux itself by definition is already orthogonal.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 198 ·
7
Replies
198
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K