“…It is seen that the main features of these curves coincide with those of curves ∆H x (x) presented in [8] for both elastic bending (curve with y 0 = 2 cm in Figs. These appear due to almost uniform magnetization M 0 (H 0x ) in the geomagnetic field [5,9]. 1 of the present article) and inelastic bending (see the other curves in the figures mentioned).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 48%
“…by measuring tangential components ∆ H x ( x , α , r ) and normal components ∆ H r ( x , α , r ) of the stray field due to the existence of a relationship between functions σ bend ( x , α , r ) and ∆ M σ ( x , α , r ) [5].…”
Section: Magnetic and Eddy Current Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the presence of small geomagnetic field H 0 , due to the magnetoelastic interaction [5], these stresses result in a substantial magnetoelastic increase in magnetization ∆ M σ whose value is much larger than magnetization M ( H 0 ) caused by the small geomagnetic field: ∆ M σ ӷ M ( H 0 ) [6,7]. Although values ∆ M σ are nonlinear functions of stress and are saturated with an increase in both the number of stressing cycles and the stress amplitude [6,7], the following tendency is always observed: a higher stress in the same field results in a higher value of ∆ M σ .…”
The tangential and normal components of the stray field of ferromagnetic steel tubes were measured. The distribution of magnetization (averaged over the cross section of the tubes) under elastic and inelastic bending of the tubes in a small geomagnetic field with a small sag increment was determined for tubes with hinged ends. It was shown that the sizes of inelastically deformed regions (IDR), hardening zones in these IDRs (in the presence of high deflections), and mean first-order internal stress σ 0 can be found by measuring the stray field.
“…It is seen that the main features of these curves coincide with those of curves ∆H x (x) presented in [8] for both elastic bending (curve with y 0 = 2 cm in Figs. These appear due to almost uniform magnetization M 0 (H 0x ) in the geomagnetic field [5,9]. 1 of the present article) and inelastic bending (see the other curves in the figures mentioned).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 48%
“…by measuring tangential components ∆ H x ( x , α , r ) and normal components ∆ H r ( x , α , r ) of the stray field due to the existence of a relationship between functions σ bend ( x , α , r ) and ∆ M σ ( x , α , r ) [5].…”
Section: Magnetic and Eddy Current Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the presence of small geomagnetic field H 0 , due to the magnetoelastic interaction [5], these stresses result in a substantial magnetoelastic increase in magnetization ∆ M σ whose value is much larger than magnetization M ( H 0 ) caused by the small geomagnetic field: ∆ M σ ӷ M ( H 0 ) [6,7]. Although values ∆ M σ are nonlinear functions of stress and are saturated with an increase in both the number of stressing cycles and the stress amplitude [6,7], the following tendency is always observed: a higher stress in the same field results in a higher value of ∆ M σ .…”
The tangential and normal components of the stray field of ferromagnetic steel tubes were measured. The distribution of magnetization (averaged over the cross section of the tubes) under elastic and inelastic bending of the tubes in a small geomagnetic field with a small sag increment was determined for tubes with hinged ends. It was shown that the sizes of inelastically deformed regions (IDR), hardening zones in these IDRs (in the presence of high deflections), and mean first-order internal stress σ 0 can be found by measuring the stray field.
“…Pauli's paper came in 1927. Even before that, in 1923, Russian physicist Yakov Grigor'evich Dorfman put forward the idea that conduction electrons in metals posses paramagnetic properties [18]. His proposal was based on a subtle observation: when one compares susceptibility of a diamagnetic metal with its ion, the susceptibility of the ion is always greater than its corresponding metal.…”
Section: Enter Dorfmanmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After the discovery of the electron spin, Pauli gave the theory of paramagnetism in metals due to free electron spin. However, Dorfman was the first to point out paramagnetism in metals [18].…”
In this article an overview of the historical development of the key ideas in the field of magnetism is presented. The presentation is semi-technical in nature.Starting by noting down important contribution of Greeks, William Gilbert, Coulomb, Poisson, Oersted, Ampere, Faraday, Maxwell, and Pierre Curie, we review early 20th century investigations by Paul Langevin and Pierre Weiss. The Langevin theory of paramagnetism and the Weiss theory of ferromagnetism were partly successful and real understanding of magnetism came with the advent of quantum mechanics. Van Vleck was the pioneer in applying quantum mechanics to the problem of magnetism and we discuss his main contributions: (1) his detailed quantum statistical mechanical study of magnetism of real gases; (2) his pointing out the importance of the crystal fields or ligand fields in the magnetic behavior of iron group salts (the ligand field theory); and (3) his many contributions to the elucidation of exchange interactions in d electron metals. Next, the pioneering contributions (but lesser known) of Dorfman are discussed. Then, in chronological order, the key contributions of Pauli, Heisenberg, and Landau are presented. Finally, we discuss a modern topic of quantum spin liquids.
A longstanding problem in natural science and later in physics was the understanding of the existence of ferromagnetism and its disappearance under heating to high temperatures. Although a qualitative description was possible by the Curie–Weiss theory, it was obvious that a microscopic model was necessary to explain the tendency of the elementary magnetons to prefer parallel ordering at low temperatures. Such a model was proposed in 1922 by Schottky within the old Bohr–Sommerfeld quantum mechanics and claimed to explain the high values of the Curie temperatures of certain ferromagnets. Based on this idea Ising formulated a new model for ferromagnetism in solids. Simultaneously the old quantum mechanics was replaced by new concepts of Heisenberg and Schrödinger and the discovery of spin. Thus Schottky’s idea was outperformed and finally replaced in 1928 by Heisenberg exchange interaction. This led to a reformulation of Ising’s model by Pauli at the Solvay conference in 1930. Nevertheless one might consider Schottky’s idea as a forerunner of this development explaining and asserting that the main point is the Coulomb energy leading to the essential interaction of neighboring elementary magnets.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.