To obtain a more accurate hysteresis curve for large Nd-Fe-B sintered magnets with high coercivity (HcJ), we employed a superconducting magnet-based vibrating sample magnetometer (SCM-VSM), which is independent of the drift. The demagnetization curves around HcJresulting from the SCM-VSM, the hysteresis graph (HG), and the pulsed-field (PF) magnetometer were compared. Attention was paid to the accurate correction of the demagnetizing field (Hd) for the cylindrical samples using a magnetometric demagnetizing factor dependent on the aspect ratio (L/D) and differential coefficient of the measured curve (dJ/dHex), where L, D, J, and Hex are the length and diameter of sample, magnetization, and applied field, respectively. The cylindrical samples used were kept at a D of 10 mm and an L of 7 and 14 mm. The hysteresis curves and magnetic properties obtained from the SCM-VSM method agreed very well with one another, except for the differential susceptibility (dJ/dHeff) near HcJusing different shapes (cylinders and sphere) and sizes of magnets, where Heffis the effective field. The squareness ratio (Hk/HcJ) and dJ/dHeffnear HcJobtained from the SCM-VSM method were found to be superior to those obtained from the PF method, where Hkis the knee field. For the sample with a higher HcJ(≥2 MA/m), the abnormality of J on the demagnetization curve had direct effects upon dJ/dHeffnear HcJand Hk/HcJin the HG method. However, a larger L/D has an effect on improving these values as has been previously found in this paper. For large magnets, the values of dJ/dHeffnear HcJand Hk/HcJwere influenced by the correction of the eddy current in the PF method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nishio et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: