Strenght of magnetic fields on magnet

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around unexpected magnetic field measurements from a bar magnet, where a measuring device recorded 9T at the north pole and 75T at the south pole instead of an expected -9T. Participants suggest that the discrepancy may arise from the orientation of the Hall probe during measurements, which can affect the readings of axial and transverse components of the magnetic field. Proper alignment of the probe is crucial for accurate measurements, as incorrect positioning can lead to significant differences in recorded values. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the measurement device's specifications and the physical characteristics of the magnet. Overall, the unusual results highlight the complexities involved in measuring magnetic fields accurately.
KyoPhan
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
In lab, we used a bar magnet and a device that can measure magnetic fields. We put the measuring device near the north part of the pole and it measured 9T. We did the same to the south, but it gave us 75T. I was expecting it to give somewhere around -9T, is that what is suppose to happen? We repeated the process, but it still gave us the same values.

Can someone help me understand what happened? Thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It should be the same at the two surfaces, but near the surface, the field is so high that something else may be going on. What is the specified range of measurement for your measuring device? How is it constructed? Did you make measurements at, say, 1cm intervals for the 10cm area above each pole? How do those measurements compare? How big is the magnet and its poles physically?
 
Er i don't know much about it. The shape was kinda like a gun where at the tip, it can measure magnetic fields in two ways. It can be by axial and i forgot what the other one was called. When we measured it it was about 4 cm away from the magnet. We did the same distance for both poles but we got some weird value.
 
It probably was a Hall probe.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/hall.html#c3"

There are usually markings on the probe that enables one to hold it such that the magnetic field is perpendicular to the conducting plate. Some probes have two perpendicular plates. One is held perpendicular to the direction of the bar magnet. This will then measure the axial component of the magnetic field - in the direction of the axis of the bar. The other plate is perpendicular to the first and it measures the the transverse component of the magnetic field. To get the strenght of the field one therefore need to combine these two components.

If you did not observe the orientation of the probe, that is you rotated it about its own axis as you measured the two different poles, the two readings would be different at the two poles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Point your index finger away from you. Hold the palm of your hand up against it. The finger represents one magnetic field line coming from one of the poles of the bar magnet. The palm of your hand is the conducting plate of the hall probe. The magnetic field line goes throught the plate and loops around and entering the magnet on the other side. If you loop your finger like that you will see that it points in the same direction again, meaning that if you held the hall probe up against the other pole the magnetic field will cross it in the same direction. This will then induce an electric potential in the same direction over the plate in both cases. That is why the sign of the measurement do not change at the two poles.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top