From: Bobhelenmcclure@.......

Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 01:11:01 EDT

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 06:18:14 EDT, ChrisAtUpw@....... writes: > Now it is time to discuss what field strength you get, and what thickness > of steel is required. Suppose for my example using 6 mm thick magnets, I use > a gap of 6 mm. The resulting distance between plates is 18 mm, 12 mm filled > with magnet, and 6 mm with air. I call the ratio of total magnet thickness to > total plate separation the filling factor. To a first approximation, the gap > field the coercive force of the magnetic material multiplied by the filling > factor. In this example, the coercive force is 12 KOe and the filling factor > is 2/3, so the gap field is 8 KOe. The accuracy of this estimate depends on > the magnet width compared to the gap size. If the gap becomes appreciable > compared to the width, you will get more fringing field and less-than-expected > gap field. Can you run through the maths and assumptions of this please? Hi Chris, I am assuming that the Nd magnet material is very hard magnetically, and has an incremental permeability almost the same as air. It can be considered to be an empty volume whose pole faces are coated uniformly with magnetic charges. Charges on one face are connected by lines of force to opposite charges. First consider a stack of magnets with infinitesimal gaps between them. In this case, opposite charges are adjacent, so all the lines cross the gap to the next magnet, and none travel back through the magnet to the opposing poles at the other end, and we get at the gap the flux of the short circuit coercive force. As we widen the gaps, more and more flux returns to the opposing face of each magnet instead of crossing the gap to the next magnet. With this line of reasoning, we are down to a flux of 50% when the gap spacing equals the magnet thickness, and so on. The four pole magnet structure can be shown to be similar in field pattern to a repeating structure of magnets and gaps, so my conclusions rest on the validity of the assumption of a relative permeability of 1.0 for the magnets. If the incremental permeability is higher than 1, then the field will fall off faster with increasing gap spacing. The finite transverse dimensions of the magnets is another reason for more rapid falloff. --BobOn Fri, 6 Oct 2006 06:18:14 EDT, ChrisAtUpw@.......=20 writes:

> Now it is time to discuss what field strength yo= u=20 get, and what thickness

> of steel is required. Suppose for my exampl= e=20 using 6 mm thick magnets, I use

> a gap of 6 mm. The resulting distan= ce=20 between plates is 18 mm, 12 mm filled

> with magnet, and 6 mm with ai= r. I=20 call the ratio of total magnet thickness to

> total plate separation=20= the=20 filling factor. To a first approximation, the gap

> field the coerciv= e=20 force of the magnetic material multiplied by the filling

> factor. In= =20 this example, the coercive force is 12 KOe and the filling factor

> i= s=20 2/3, so the gap field is 8 KOe. The accuracy of this estimate depends on=20

> the magnet width compared to the gap size. If the gap becomes=20 appreciable

> compared to the width, you will get more fringing field= and=20 less-than-expected

> gap field.Can you run through the maths and=20 assumptions of this please?

Hi Chris,

I am assuming that the Nd magnet material is very hard=20 magnetically, and has an incremental permeability almost the same as air. It= can=20 be considered to be an empty volume whose pole faces are coated uniform= ly=20 with magnetic charges. Charges on one face are connected by lines of force t= o=20 opposite charges. First consider a stack of magnets with infinitesimal gaps=20 between them. In this case, opposite charges are adjacent, so all the lines=20 cross the gap to the next magnet, and none travel back through the magnet to= the=20 opposing poles at the other end, and we get at the gap the flux of the short= =20 circuit coercive force. As we widen the gaps, more and more flux returns to=20= the=20 opposing face of each magnet instead of crossing the gap to the next magnet.= =20 With this line of reasoning, we are down to a flux of 50% when the gap spaci= ng=20 equals the magnet thickness, and so on.The four pole magnet structure can be shown to be similar in fie= ld=20 pattern to a repeating structure of magnets and gaps, so my conclusions rest= on=20 the validity of the assumption of a relative permeability of 1.0 for the=20 magnets. If the incremental permeability is higher than 1, then the field wi= ll=20 fall off faster with increasing gap spacing. The finite transverse dimension= s of=20 the magnets is another reason for more rapid falloff.--Bob