Priniciple of Minimum Energy vs. Maxwell equations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges of applying Maxwell's equations to coupled magneto-mechanical problems involving a deformable ferromagnetic bar in a magnetic field. The author is exploring an energy minimization approach to find the magnetic field, which incorporates both magnetic and mechanical energies, while also attempting to derive results using Maxwell's equations. They express concern that Maxwell's equations may not adequately account for changes in mechanical energy due to induced magnetization in deformable media. The author has proposed a modified version of Ampere's law for stressed bodies but faces skepticism from their professor regarding its validity. The conversation highlights the complexities of integrating mechanical stress with electromagnetic theory in deformable materials.
Hassan2
Messages
422
Reaction score
5
Dear all,

I'm studying a paper on coupled magneto-mechanical problems.

Suppose we have a "deformable" ferromagnetic bar placed in an initially uniform magnetic field. Both ends of the bar are clamped. The bar has magnetostriction property, so it may expand or contract depending on the the magnitude of the flux density.

In the paper, in order to find the magnetic field numerically, it takes the approach of energy minimization and here the energy is the sum of magnetic and mechanical energies. Both magnetic field and deformation is obtained this way.

I'm trying to solve the problem using Maxwell equation ( ∇×(B/μ)=0) rather than energy minimization, but it seems the Maxwell equation does not take into account the change in mechanical energy due to the induced magnetization even though the permeability may depend on the mechanical stress.

I wonder if the Maxwell equation incomplete when it comes to deformable media? This would be disappointing to me.

I would really appreciate if you helped me overcome the problem.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have derived the following equation for magneto static case and I call it Amper's law for stressed bodies:

\nabla \times H = J_{f}-\sigma_{ij}\frac{\partial \epsilon_{ij}}{\partial A}

\sigma and \epsilon are the elastic stress and strain respectively and Einstein's summation notation has been used. A is magnetic vector potential.

My professor became angry at me for saying this because he can't believe that Ampere's low is invalid for stressed deformable bodies. He can't disprove it and he doesn't want to see my proof either.

I am not 100% sure of the equation but the derivation is straight forward and It makes sense too. I wonder if any of you has seen such an equation ?

Thanks
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top