2015
DOI: 10.1007/s11837-015-1415-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermal Activation in Permanent Magnets

Abstract: The coercive field of permanent magnets decays with temperature. At non-zero temperature the system can overcome a finite energy barrier through thermal fluctuations. Using finite element micromagnetic simulations, we quantify this effect, which reduces coercivity in addition to the decrease of the coercive field associated with the temperature dependence of the anisotropy field, and validate the method through comparison with existing experimental data.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
19
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…All calculated coercive fi eld values are higher than the experimental coercive fi eld (Table 2 ). This can be related to the fact that (i) the real physical discontinuity that occur at stacking faults is less than that assumed, as explained above, (ii) numerical calculation overestimates the fraction of the surface area that is pinned, due to the small size of the considered model, and (iii) thermal activation has not been taken into account in the presented simulation and this may reduce the coercive fi eld by 10-15% at 300 K, which is in agreement with both theoretical modeling [ 25 ] and experiments. [ 26 ] The calculated coercive-fi eld value increases signifi cantly as the thickness of the defect region is reduced, which may be related to the "spring-magnet" effect.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…All calculated coercive fi eld values are higher than the experimental coercive fi eld (Table 2 ). This can be related to the fact that (i) the real physical discontinuity that occur at stacking faults is less than that assumed, as explained above, (ii) numerical calculation overestimates the fraction of the surface area that is pinned, due to the small size of the considered model, and (iii) thermal activation has not been taken into account in the presented simulation and this may reduce the coercive fi eld by 10-15% at 300 K, which is in agreement with both theoretical modeling [ 25 ] and experiments. [ 26 ] The calculated coercive-fi eld value increases signifi cantly as the thickness of the defect region is reduced, which may be related to the "spring-magnet" effect.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…The reduction of the coercive field owing to demagnetizing effects equates to N eff = 0.2. Finally, we take into account thermal activation by computing the energy barrier for the nucleation of reversed domains as function of field [38]. The decrease of coercivity by thermal activation is µ 0 H f = 0.23 T.…”
Section: Permanent Magnets and Intrinsic Magnetic Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The critical field value at which the energy barrier becomes 25k B is the temperature dependent coercive field. T = 450 K. Data taken from[38]. (b) Coercivity of a Nd 2 Fe 14 B particle as function of the percentage of coverage with a Tb-containing shell for the continuous coverage model and the percolation model.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, we discuss the external magnetic field H ext response of the energy barrier (activation energy) [20][21][22][23][24] which governs the probability of magnetization reversal via the thermal fluctuation of spins. If this response can be measured experimentally, 25 it would allow the magnetic coercivity mechanism to be predicted at finite temperatures.…”
Section: Energy Barriermentioning
confidence: 99%