Undergrad Shielding behavior of a steel cuboid in a DC magnetic field

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on simulating magnetic shielding using a rectangular steel box in a 100 mT DC magnetic field. The unexpected results show that when the box's long side is perpendicular to the field, the internal magnetic field drops to around 20 mT, while the short side orientation results in a 40 mT internal field. This contradicts the initial assumption that a longer side would enhance magnetic flux coupling and improve shielding effectiveness. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is that the longer flux path increases reluctance, thus reducing shielding efficiency. Suggestions include thickening the long-side walls to mitigate the increased reluctance.
thinksolid
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Simulating a steel shielding box in a 100 mT DC magnetic field shows counterintuitive results depending on orientation. I'm trying to understand why less magnetic field penetrates the shorter side of the cuboid.
Hello everyone,

I'm currently working on simulating magnetic shielding.
The shielding enclosure is a rectangular steel box placed in a homogeneous DC magnetic field of 100 mT in air.
The steel box has a wall thickness of 3 mm on every side. The inside is filled with air.


Here’s the issue:
  • When the box is oriented with its long side perpendicular to the magnetic field, the internal field drops to around 20 mT.
  • When the short side is perpendicular to the field, the internal field rises to 40 mT.

This result is the opposite of what I expected. I assumed that having the long side perpendicular to the field would couple more magnetic flux into the material, pushing the shielding closer to saturation and thus allowing more field to penetrate into the interior.


Why is my assumption incorrect? Measurements of the box in realiy showed the same result.


Any insights would be appreciated!

1752138025035.webp

Arrows indicate the direction of the external magnetic field.
(~20 mT max. inside)

1752138098210.webp

(~40 mT max. inside)

1752138139674.gif

Simulation environment, external field in green
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.
thinksolid said:
Why is my assumption incorrect?
I suspect that the longer flux path increases the reluctance, so reduces the shielding.
Try thickening the long-side walls proportionally, to compensate for the increased length.
 
  • Like
Likes DaveE and berkeman
Topic about reference frames, center of rotation, postion of origin etc Comoving ref. frame is frame that is attached to moving object, does that mean, in that frame translation and rotation of object is zero, because origin and axes(x,y,z) are fixed to object? Is it same if you place origin of frame at object center of mass or at object tail? What type of comoving frame exist? What is lab frame? If we talk about center of rotation do we always need to specified from what frame we observe?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K