Re: Magnetic Shielding Materials

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on magnetic shielding materials, exploring the effectiveness of various metals and alloys for shielding applications, particularly in contexts such as electronics and satellites. Participants examine both empirical measurements and scientific principles related to material properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Michael suggests that nickel, copper, and steel are good standalone magnetic shielding materials, but questions whether alloys like Co-netic are superior due to empirical measurements or scientific reasons.
  • One participant challenges Michael's assertion about copper, stating it is ineffective as a magnetic shield and that nickel and steel are not the best options, citing their relative permeabilities compared to materials like Mumetal and MetGlas.
  • Another participant notes that the choice of shielding compounds for satellites depends on specific applications and bureaucratic constraints, mentioning Co-netic alloys for small parts and mu-metal for larger components.
  • A later reply references the use of soft iron for shielding micro-electronics but argues that mu-metal would be more suitable due to its higher permittivity per unit mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness of various magnetic shielding materials, with no consensus reached on the best materials or the reasons behind their effectiveness.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include references to material properties such as permeability and geometric factors affecting shielding capability, but specific assumptions and definitions are not fully explored.

miloko
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I was looking into magnetic shielding materials. I have the impression that nickle, copper, steel standalone are good shileding materials. However, some people claim that an alloy of these elements (eg. netics) are better shielding materials. Is this simply an empirical measurement or is there a scientific reason behind it?

Thanks,
Michael
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
miloko said:
Hi all,

I was looking into magnetic shielding materials. I have the impression that nickle, copper, steel standalone are good shileding materials. However, some people claim that an alloy of these elements (eg. netics) are better shielding materials. Is this simply an empirical measurement or is there a scientific reason behind it?

Thanks,
Michael
You must not be speaking of magnetic shielding.

Copper is pretty useless as a magnetic shield (it's hardly better than air) with a relative permeability fairly close to 1. While nickel and steel could be used for magnetic shields, they are not anywhere near the best materials. They have permeabilities close to a couple hundred. On the other hand, Mumetal and MetGlas have permeabilities that are in the tens (or hundreds) of thousands.

As for a reason - the reason is in the permeabilities of the materials. A greater permeability implies a higher flux density inside the material, which results in a reduced flux density outside the material, and in its vicinity. This is essentially what magnetic shielding is.

Note: Shielding capability involves geometric factors in addition to material properties - the above comparison is with a fixed geometry.
 
Last edited:
What shield compounds are used for satellites?
 
Mk said:
What shield compounds are used for satellites?
Depends on the specific area where it's used in addition to all kinds of other bureaucratic constraints. Most commonly, I believe Co-netic alloys are used on small parts like specific PCBs and some kind of mu-metal alloy (like Hy-mu) is used in larger parts, like detector assemblies.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
40K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K