Mumetal Metalwork: Bending 0.004" Permalloy-80 for 6" Radius

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ravaner
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Bending a 0.004" sheet of Permalloy-80 for a 6" radius is feasible without significantly damaging its magnetic properties. Previous experiences with bending mumetal for enclosures with radii of 14cm and 8cm have shown that the material retains its performance. Gentle bending techniques are recommended to maintain the integrity of the magnetic shield. Users have reported positive outcomes with similar applications. Overall, careful handling during the bending process should preserve the material's effectiveness.
Ravaner
Messages
134
Reaction score
3
Hello ! I'm going to use thin ( 0.004" ) sheet of Permalloy-80 to realize a magnetic shield ( against european 50 Hz mains ). I have to bend this sheet to give it a 6" radius curvature. I would like to know if this treatment will not dammage and annihilate the magnetic properties of this material.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bending a thin sheet so gently should not change the material's properties.
 
I have used mumetal to make 2 enclosures one with a 14cm radius and one about 8. The material seems to be performing well
 
Very useful replies. many thanks.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

Could New Materials Propel China's Industry to Bill Gates-Level Success?
Replies
4
Views
10K
Alternative spacelaunch methods
Replies
10
Views
4K
Civilization of millions of rings.
Replies
3
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top