You are on page 1of 27

School of Engineering and Science

Advanced Physics A + B Lab I 200221

Magnetic field of Helmholtz coils

Anais Colibaba Group 6

Andrei Ignat

November 11 12, 2013

Abstract The aim of this experiment was to investigate the magnetic eld in a Helmholtz coil setup. In the rst part, the component of the magnetic eld in the z-direction was measured as a function of the relative distance between the Hall probe and the center of a single at circular coil. The same procedure was applied to a long cylindrical coil. The second part required also measuring Bz as a dependence of the relative distance to the coils for dierent inter-coil separations a. For a=R, where R was the coil radius, it could be noticed that inner eld was constant. Next, the radial and z-component of the magnetic eld were investigated as a function of r and z for a Helmholtz arrangement. In the end, a two turn-coil was placed in the middle of the Helmholtz setup. The linear dependencies between the force and the current through the Helmholtz coil, the current through the small coil and the sine of of the angle created by the magnetic moment and the magnetic eld were observed.

Contents
1 Introduction and Theory 2 Experimental setup and procedure 2.1 Single coil measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Helmholtz coils measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Torque measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Results and Data Analysis 3.1 Single coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Helmholtz coils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 Magnetic eld of two parallel coils . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Determination of Bz of a Helmholtz arrangement 3.2.3 Determination of Br of a Helmholtz arrangement 3.3 Torque measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 References 3 4 4 4 5 7 7 10 10 16 20 24 27

. . . . . . for for . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dierent dierent . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . radii radii . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and z-positions and z-positions . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

Introduction and Theory

In this experiment, the magnetic eld determined by Helmholtz coils was investigated. The rst part of the experiment consisted of an analysis of the magnetic eld induced by current owing through a single coil setup. The second part of the experiment involved the analysis of the magnetic eld determined by a two coil system was analyzed. Firstly, the distance between the two coils was varied and the magnetic ux along the z -axis was measured as a function of the distance z from the center of the coil system. Then, the distance between the two coils was kept constant such that the coil system could be treated as a Helmholtz coil system i.e. the distance between the coils was set to a=R. The magnetic ux was measured as a function of the distance z from the center of the coil system for dierent radial position r from the symmetry axis. Then, the radial ux density was measured along the z-axis as a function of the radial position r. In the last part of the experiment, the dependence of the torque induced in a conductor loop carrying a current in a uniform magnetic eld was investigated in relation to the strength of the magnetic eld, the angle between the area vector and the magnetic eld lines respectively in dependence to the strength of the magnetic moment of the small coil. The core theoretical consideration that is used in this experiment is Biot-Savarts Law which describes the magnetic eld dB that is induced by a certain current I as dB = I0 dl r 4 r 3 (1)

where dl is the conductor element, r is the position vector pointing from the magnetic eld to the measured conductor element. One can see the the magnetic eld is thus parallel to both the position vector r and to the conductor element vector dl. If we consider the radius of the coil to be denoted by R and the distance from the plane of the coil to be denoted by Z, the length of the position vector r is described by: r 2 = R2 + Z 2 Thus, Equation 1 becomes: dl I0 (2) 2 4 R + Z 2 Since all the contributions from the conductor element cancel out, the radial component of the magnetic eld is zero. The z-component of the magnetic eld(which does not cancel out) is thus given by: dB = R2 I0 (3) 2 (R2 + Z 2 )3/2 The equation above applies however for a coil with a single turn. For two coils, each having N turns, set at a distance a apart, the magnetic eld is given by Bz (z, r = 0) = 1 1 N I0 + 2 3 / 2 3/2 2R (1 + A1 ) (1 + A2 2) where A1 and A2 represent the distance from each coil and are given by Bz (z, r = 0) = A1 = (4)

Z a/2 Z + a/2 A2 = R R with Z measured such that the center of the coordinate system is the same as the center of the coil system. When the distance between the two coils is a = R, the system is called a Helmholtz coil system. In a Helmoltz coil system, the magnetic eld is constant at the positions Z with R/2 < Z < R/2. If a coil with a magnetic moment is introduced in between two Helmoltz coils, it will experience a torque. For the experiment at hand, the conductor had a circular shape with radius r and n turns. Thus, the magnetic moment was obtained as: R dl = I A da m= 1 2I |m| = I n r2 (5) da = nA A |A| = r2 3

The torque induced in this coil is therefore can therefore be obtained by using the general denition of the torque and Equation 5 as T =mB |T | = m B sin (6) |T | = c I B sin where c is a constant that characterizes the Helmholtz coils.

2
2.1

Experimental setup and procedure


Single coil measurement

The aim of the rst section of this experiment was to measure the magnetic eld created by a single coil which was connected in series to a power supply and a multimeter, instrument that displayed the current owing through the coils. The radius of the coils was taken from the producers specications. The magnetic ux created by a coil was measured with an axial Hall probe. The probe was directly connected to CASSY where the values of the magnetic ux were displayed for every point. The Hall probe was placed by use of a support on a meter scale which was taped on the table. For every recorded position which led to the determination of the distance r between the coil and the magnetic ux point, the support would slide along the xed meter scale. A priori to the measurements, the probe was placed at a considerable distance from the current conducting object so it could be calibrated by setting an oset factor of 0.35 mT caused by background noise. The CASSY settings comprised of the usage of a (-10)mT - (10)mT scale and of displaying only the averaged values over 100 ms due to the large uctuations. The tip of the Hall probe was xed in the center of the coil. The value of the current was set to I=2.99 A. The probe slided along the scale in the z-direction so that the values of the magnetic ux and the relative positions between the coil and the probe were recorded. The set-up for this part can be observed in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Experimental set-up for the determination of the magnetic eld generated in the z-direction by a thin coil Afterwards, the at round coil was replaced by a long cylindrical one. The set-up conditions were kept the same and the probe was moved at several z-positions. The set-up can be seen in Figure 2.1.

2.2

Helmholtz coils measurement

In this part, the magnetic eld generated by two coils was measured. The coils were connected in series to a power supply and a multimeter whereas the Hall probe was again connected to CASSY. The chosen oset value of the magnetic eld was set to 0.14 mT, the displayed values were averaged gata over 100 ms and the voltage was 15 V. First, several dierent inter-coil separations a ranging from 40 to 10 cm were considered where the radius of the coils was known to be R=20 cm. For each a, the axial magnetic ux was measured as a function of all the positions r at which the Hall probe was placed. The set-up for this section can be seen in Figure 3. Next, the coils were xed at a distance a=R from each other, thus forming a Helmholtz arrangement. The settings were once again kept unchanged and the position of the probe was set in the center of the system.

Figure 2: Experimental set-up for the determination of the magnetic eld generated in the z-direction by a long coil

Figure 3: Experimental set-up for the determination of the magnetic eld generated in the z-direction by two coils The magnetic ux pointing in the horizontal direction was varied for dierent heights of the probe i.e. for each distance z between the tip of the probe and the rst coil which could be easily determined from the gradings on the probe, the height of the probe would be readjusted along the central axis of the coil system, thus modifying the radius of the investigated magnetic eld. The set-up for this part can be seen in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Experimental set-up for the determination of the magnetic eld generated in the z-direction by two coils where the height of the probe is varied Lastly, the Helmholtz coils were turned by 90 so that the radial component Br could be determined for dierent distances r from the probe to the center of the coils. For each set of data, the probe would be varied along the meter, i.e. z would change and the the relative position to the rst coil would be recorded. The set-up for this last part can be seen in Figure 5.

2.3

Torque measurements

In this nal section of the experiment, the torque experienced by a current loop in a magnetic eld generated by a Helmholtz arrangement was measured as a function of the current through the Helmholtz coils, the initial angle between the magnetic moment and the magnetic eld and the current through the conductor 5

Figure 5: Experimental set-up for the determination of the magnetic eld generated in the radial direction by two coils i.e. through the small coil. The set-up was kept the same, only that a torsion dynamometer was placed on a support rod above the arrangement. A wire loop with two turns was connected to the dynamometer and in series to a multimeter and a power supply. While the power supply was turned o, the dynamometer was calibrated to the zero point by turning the knob on the top of the dynamometer to the 0 position. Once the torque of the current loop was generated, the knob changed its position indicating the value of the corresponding force. Firstly, the torque was determined as a function of the magnetic eld generated by the coil i.e. in dependence of its current, while the strength of the magnetic moment and the angle between it and the magnetic eld were kept xed. Then, the torque was obtained in dependence of the initial angle, while the magnetic moment and eld were kept constant. Then angles were changed with increments of 30 that could be read o the grading. In the end, the torque depending on the Helmholtz current was measured while the other two quantities were kept constant. The set-up for this last part can be seen in Figure 6:

Figure 6: Experimental set-up for determination of torque as a function of magnetic eld, angle and current

3
3.1

Results and Data Analysis


Single coil

The setup for this experiment was done according to the procedure described in Section 2.1. In order to measure the magnetic ux along the radial direction, the CASSY system was used. The measurement system was calibrated such that the eects of the background noise would not aect the measurement of the magnetic eld. Thus, the CASSY output was modied such that the oset given by the background noise was taken into consideration as o = 0.35 mT . The values were averaged over a period of 100 ms on the smallest available scale i.e. 10 mT The radius of the coil was taken from the producers specications[1] as R = 200 mm. Before the measurement was started, the tip of the probe was aligned with the approximate center of the Helmholtz coil system such that the radial position could be considered as r 0. The measurement was done by moving the axial Hall probe along the z-axis of the system. The main error sources for this part of the experiment came from the sliding system that was used to change the z-position of the system with z = 0.1 cm and the scale of the magnetic ux measurement with B = 0.0.1 mT . After the measurement was done, the absolute values for the position of the probe were recalibrated such that the relative position of zrel = 0 would coincide with the at which the magnetic eld took a maximum value. For this part of the experiment, the current inside each of the coils had an intensity I = 2.99 pm0.01 A and a voltage of U = 11 1 V . The errors in this measurement come from the scale of the measuring instrument. Single coil measurement The procedure above was used to analyze the magnetic eld generated by one the coils that was later used the in Helmholtz coils system. The measured values for this part of the experiment can be seen in Table 1. These values along with the error bars due to the scale of the measuring instruments were then plotted in Figure 7. Discussion and conclusion As can be seen, the magnetic ux for the single coil decreases according to the inverse of the distance 1 r . This is in accordance with the theoretical prediction. One can observe in Figure 7 that, the after the magnetic eld reaches its maximum value, it does not decrease abruptly but has a at tip which is due to the fact that the coil is not an ideal one and therefore has a thickness dierent from zero, hence the lack of an abrupt change from the maximum value. Table 1: Single coil measurements zabs [cm] Bz [mT] zrel [cm] 9.4 0.14 38.6 15.3 0.19 32.7 23.5 0.34 24.5 26.5 0.42 21.5 28.4 0.49 19.6 30.8 0.60 17.2 32.4 0.67 15.6 34.5 0.79 13.5 35.7 0.86 12.3 37.7 0.98 10.3 38.8 1.06 9.2 40.2 1.14 7.8 42 1.24 6.0 44.1 1.34 3.9 46.3 1.41 1.7 48 1.43 0 50.4 1.39 -2.4 52.6 1.31 -4.6 56 1.14 -8 7

Figure 7: Dependence of Bz w.r.t. the relative position zrel for a single coil

Long coil measurement The second part of the single coil measurement involved the measurement of the magnetic eld inside a long coil. The length of the coil was measured as l = 41 0.1 cm. The absolute values that were recorded for the position along the z -axis were then recalibrated such that the maximum value recorded for the magnetic ux would be positioned at zrel = 0 cm. It was observed that since the length of the coil could no longer be ignored, the magnetic ux assumed an almost constant value inside the coil. The error in the measurement of the magnetic ux respectively of the z -position are the same as for the previous part of the experiment. The measured values are presented in Table 2 and were plotted in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Dependence of Bz w.r.t. the relative position zrel for a single, long coil The maximum value recorded for the magnetic ux was then used to compute the number of turns the coil had. In order to do this, the theoretical number of coils was obtained by approximating that the coil had 3 turns/cm and as such, the theoretical number of coils was obtained as nt = l 3 turns = 123 turns cm

with the error in the number of turns equal to nt = 0.1 cm 3 turns cm 1turn. The experimentally determined value was obtained from to the following equation Bl = 0 ne I ne = Bl 0 I

Table 2: Long coil measurements zabs [cm] Bz [mT] zrel [cm] 15.6 0.01 -42.4 19 0.01 -39 22.1 0.02 -35.9 24.5 0.03 -33.5 27.2 0.05 -30.8 30.4 0.08 -27.6 33 0.13 -25 37.3 0.27 -20.7 38.6 0.44 -19.4 40.2 0.57 -17.8 42.1 0.75 -15.9 43.6 0.84 -14.4 45.3 0.92 -12.7 47.4 0.98 -10.6 49.4 1 -8.6 51 1.02 -7 54.2 1.04 -3.8 57.3 1.03 -0.7 60 1.04 2 65.3 1.04 7.3 68.3 1.03 10.3 71 1.01 13 73.2 0.98 15.2 75.4 0.9 17.4 78.1 0.73 20.1 81.1 0.46 23.1 83.3 0.28 25.3

The error in the theoretical number of turns can be obtained using n e = ne B B


2

ne l l

ne I I

ne B B

ne l l

ne I I

2 turns

Therefore, the theoretical value of the number of turns respectively the experimental value are: nt = 123 1 turns ne = 114 2 turns Discussion and conclusion It can be seen that even though the theoretical value for the number of turns does not agree with the experimental one within their error ranges, the values are extremely close together. The major error source in the experiment was background noise which was inherently registered by the axial Hall probe. Even though the CASSY system was set to register values with a predened oset, the background noise was not constant and, as such, the initial oset does not necessarily represent the oset at a dierent time in the measurement. Nevertheless, the magnetic eld was observed to be constant inside the coil and decreasing at an approximate rate of 1 r outside the coil. Therefore, even though the measured values were inuenced by background noise, the general behavior of the magnetic eld is in agreement with the theoretical prediction.

3.2

Helmholtz coils

Two coils were connected in series and the measurements were taken at various distances a = 40, 30, 25, 20, 10 cm where the radius of each coil is R=20 cm. In all measurements, z=0 was set for the position of the tip of the Hall probe whenever it was in the center of the rst coil and all subsequent distance measurements were done relative to this original value. 3.2.1 Magnetic eld of two parallel coils

Determination of Bz along the z -axis for a separation of a = 2R The current was kept at a constant value of I=2.99 A and an oset value of B=0.14 mT was set for all following measurements. All the positions of the Hall probe along the meter scale were recorded with their correspondent magnetic eld values. The uncertainties of the data were taken from the accuracies of the measuring instruments. Therefore, the uncertainties in the measurement of the position z and of the Bz component of the magnetic eld were set as : z = 0.1 cm Bz = 0.01 mT These uncertainties were used in the following parts as well. Therefore the inter-coil distance was for the rst part: a = (40 0.1) cm The gathered data can be seen in Table 3: The vertical line in Figure 9 shows the position of the second coil relative to the rst, the position of the latter being chosen as the origin of the x-axis. This indication will occur in all the following graphs and it will bear the same meaning. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION As was expected, the magnetic eld starts to drop for values larger than the separation a between the coils. As approaching the coils, maxima of the magnetic eld can be observed. Since it is not a Helmholtz arrangement, the magnetic eld between the coils is far from being constant, experiencing a visible drop in the center. However, a considerable portion in the middle seems to be approximated to a constant value.

10

Table 3: Measured Bz for a=2R z [cm] z[cm] B [mT] 41.3 0 1.57 46.4 5.1 1.56 50.9 9.6 1.4 53.8 12.5 1.25 56.5 15.2 1.14 60.9 19.6 1.04 63.4 22.1 1.02 66.3 25 1.04 69.4 28.1 1.15 72.2 30.9 1.28 75.9 34.6 1.43 78.5 37.2 1.54 81.3 40 1.57 84.3 43 1.55 87.4 46.1 1.46

Figure 9: Bz for a=2R Determination of Bz along the z-axis for a separation of a = 3 2 R In this part of the experiment, the current had a value of I=2.98 A. The distance between the two coils was set at a = 30 0.1 cm. The value at which the Hall probe was in the middle of the rst coil was z = 41.4 cm, value for which the maximum of the magnetic eld was approximately attained. The gathered data along the uncertainties can be seen in Table 4 and the visual dependency can be observed in Figure 10 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The magnetic eld drops for positions outside the coil system. As the Hall probe was approaching the coils, maxima of the magnetic eld can be observed. A visible drop can be observed in between the coils although it can once again be seen that the signicant portion in the middle stays constant.
.5 Determination of Bz along the z-axis for a separation of a = 22 R For this part, the current had a value of I=2.98 A. The distance between the two coils was set at a = 25 0.1 cm. The value at which the Hall probe was in the middle of the rst coil was z=44.7 cm, value for which the maximum of the magnetic eld was approximately attained. The gathered data along the uncertainties can be seen in Table 5 and the graph in gure 11 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The magnetic eld drops for positions outside the coil system. As approaching the coils, maxima of the magnetic eld can be observed. A slight drop can be observed in

11

Table 4: Measured Bz for a = 3 2R z [cm] z[cm] B [mT] 32.3 -9.1 1.08 35.5 -5.9 1.31 38.8 -2.6 1.53 41.4 0 1.64 44.7 3.3 1.69 47.4 6 1.65 50.6 9.2 1.58 53.7 12.3 1.52 56.6 15.2 1.47 59.4 18 1.48 62.4 21 1.52 65.9 24.5 1.61 68.7 27.3 1.67 71.8 30.4 1.69 75.2 33.8 1.58 78.8 37.4 1.4 83.2 41.8 1.09

Table 5: Measured Bz for a = 33.7 -7.2 1.21 37.7 -3.2 1.51 40.9 0 1.71 44.7 3.8 1.79 48.2 7.3 1.79 50.7 9.8 1.75 53.4 12.5 1.73 56.7 15.8 1.72 59.3 18.4 1.75 62.4 21.5 1.78 65.7 24.8 1.79 68.9 28 1.71 73.3 32.4 1.46 76.4 35.5 1.24

2.5 2 R

12

3 Figure 10: Bz for a = 2 R

Figure 11: Bz for a =

2.5 2 R

between the coils although it can be approximated to almost constant as the variation is insignicant. It can be deduced that this set-up is the closest to a Helmholtz arrangement so far. Determination of Bz along the z-axis for a separation of a = R Here, the current had a value of I=2.97 A. The distance between the two coils was set at a = 20 0.1 cm. The value at which the Hall probe was in the middle of the rst coil was z=49.3 cm, value for which the maximum of the magnetic eld was approximately attained. The collected data with uncertainties can be seen in Table 6 and the visual dependency in Figure 12 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION From Figure 12 it can be inferred that the eld in a Helmholtz arrangement is kept constant when measured along the axial center of the two coils. Therefore, since the condition for such an arrangement is to set the inter-coil distance equal to the radii, the larger these are, the more surface will the constant eld cover. Determination of Bz along the z-axis for a separation of a = 1 2 R For this part, the current had a value of I=2.98 A. The distance between the two coils was set at a = 10 0.1 cm. The value at which the Hall probe was in the middle of the system was at z=48.5 cm, value for which the maximum of the magnetic eld was approximately attained. The data along their correspondent error can be seen in Table 7 while gure 13depicts the required dependency: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The magnetic eld drops for positions outside the coil system and the magnetic eld in between the coils is denitely not constant but rapidly increasing and then decreasing as it is not a Helmholtz arrangement.

13

Table 6: Measured Bz for a = R 32.4 -16.9 1.17 36.4 -12.9 1.48 40.2 -9.1 1.76 43.4 -5.9 1.92 46.4 -2.9 2.01 49.3 0 2.02 52.1 2.8 2.03 55.4 6.1 2.03 58.7 9.4 2.01 61.8 12.5 1.94 65.4 16.1 1.75 68.2 18.9 1.55 71.6 22.3 1.27

1 Table 7: Measured Bz for a = 2 R z [cm] z[cm] B [mT] 34.6 -13.9 1.65 38.4 -10.1 2.04 41.1 -7.4 2.28 44.4 -4.1 2.5 48.5 0 2.56 51.4 2.9 2.49 54.3 5.8 2.29 57.4 8.9 2.02 60.4 11.9 1.69

14

Figure 12: Bz for a = R

1 Figure 13: Bz for a = 2 R

15

3.2.2

Determination of Bz of a Helmholtz arrangement for dierent radii and z-positions

The set-up from the previous parts was kept constant. The coils were placed at a xed distance equal to their radius in order to form a Helmholtz arrangement, thus a=R=20 0.1 cm. The measurements were done for a xed z at various distances r from the center of the system as the height of the probe was adjusted along the central vertical axis of the coils. The current owing through the coils was kept at I=2.91 A for all measurements. The uncertainties in the measurement of the distance were considered from the meter scale accuracies. The errors in the measurements of the current of the z-component of the magnetic eld were taken from the multimeter and the teslameter, respectively. Therefore, their values are: z = 0.1 cm r = 0.1 cm B = 0.01 mT I = 0.1 A The values z for which the radial component of the magnetic eld was measured were chosen at z=5.7 cm, z=9.9 cm, z=12.6 cm, z=16.7 cm, z=19.8 cm. The collected data can be seen in Tables 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 while the graphical dependencies can be observed in Figures 14, 15, (16), (17 ) and 18 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION From the plots, it can be observed that the magnetic eld takes a constant value when both the axial position z and the radial position r are in the center of the Helmholtz coil system. This result is in accordance with the theoretical expectations. When the axial position is not in the center of the system i.e. when z = 9.9 cm, the magnetic ux has a peak at the positions where the coils are situated and is smaller in the middle of the system. This is again in accordance to the theoretical predictions since the superposition of the magnetic eld lines does not lead to a perfect constructive addition of the two vector elds. Therefore, the magnetic ux is observed to be stronger at when the axial position z is closer to the axial positions of the two coils. Therefore, the axial center of the Helmholtz coil system is considered to be: z 9.9 cm

Table 8: Measured Bz for z=5.7 cm and a=R r[cm] Bz [mT] 39.3 1.76 37 1.92 34.1 1.96 31.6 1.95 29.4 1.94 27 1.93 25.4 1.93 23 1.92 21 1.93 19.1 1.93 17.5 1.95 16.8 1.96 15.4 1.96 13.6 1.98 11.9 1.96 10.7 1.94 9.3 1.88 8.2 1.79

16

Table 9: Measured Bz for z=9.9 cm and a=R r[cm] Bz [mT] 38.3 1.49 36 1.71 33.9 1.81 31.8 1.87 28.1 1.89 25 1.88 22.8 1.9 20.4 1.9 17.9 1.9 15.5 1.88 13.4 1.84 10.5 1.72 8.5 1.53

Table 10: Measured Bz for z=12.6 cm and a=R r[cm] Bz [mT] 8.5 1.69 13 1.89 15.5 1.9 18.8 1.89 21.3 1.88 24.6 1.88 27.7 1.88 30.5 1.87 34.1 1.83 37.4 1.65

Table 11: Measured Bz for z=16.7 cm and a=R r[cm] Bz [mT] 34.1 2.02 30 1.88 27.6 1.83 25.1 1.81 22.7 1.82 20.5 1.83 17.5 1.88 14 1.98 10.5 2.19 8.4 2.5

17

Table 12: Measured Bz for z=19.8 cm and a=R r[cm] Bz [mT] 38.1 2.75 34 2.01 31 1.83 27.9 1.73 24.7 1.7 22.2 1.7 19.6 1.73 16.7 1.81 13.1 2.01 10.3 2.35 8.6 2.88

Figure 14: Measured Bz for z=5.7 cm and a=R

Figure 15: Measured Bz for z=9.9 cm and a=R

18

Figure 16: Measured Bz for z=12.6 cm and a=R

Figure 17: Measured Bz for z=16.7 cm and a=R

Figure 18: Measured Bz for z=19.8 cm and a=R

19

3.2.3

Determination of Br of a Helmholtz arrangement for dierent radii and z-positions

Once again, the previous settings were kept the same while the oset value of the magnetic eld was taken as Br = 0.45mT . The coils were placed in a Helmholtz arrangement i.e. a = R =20 0.1 cm. The measurements were done for a xed r (the position of the coils along the meter scale) at various positions z along a meter scale perpendicular to the one the coils are xed on. The current owing through the coils was kept at I=2.91 A for all measurements. The uncertainties in the quantities were taken from the instrument accuracies. The same uncertainties were considered as in the previous sections. The collected data can be found in the following tables along with their corresponding graphs 19, 20, 21, 22. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION As can be observed from the measured values and their corresponding plots, the values measured for the radial component of the magnetic ux are extremely small. Since the dierence between dierent values is also extremely small, the background noise will greatly inuence this part of the measurement. Even though the background noise was theoretically removed by setting an oset on the CASSY system, it still inuences the measured values. Therefore, an improvement for this part of the experiment would be to use a more sensitive measurement instrument as well as to perform the experiment in a better isolated environment. Nevertheless, the magnetic ux density experiences uctuations. One can see in the plots that there is an increase in the magnetic ux over an approximate distance of 20 cm which is the distance between the two coils. The uctuations in the measured values are also due to the imperfect alignment of the system since the Hall probe could not be perfectly aligned with the parallel direction of the system. Table 13: Measured Br z[cm] 50.2 43.3 40.4 37.7 34.4 31.3 29.7 for r = 59.2 cm and a=R B [mT] 0.09 0.13 0.15 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.11

Table 14: Measured Br z[cm] 27.4 30.4 33.6 36.3 39.2 42.7 45.6

for z=62.6 cm and a=R B [mT] 0.03 0.07 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.04

Table 15: Measured Br z[cm] 45 42.1 38.8 35.2 31.8 28.9 27.7

for z=65.9cm and a=R B [mT] 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.11 0.08 0.03 0.05

20

Table 16: Measured Br z[cm] 27.8 31.6 34.3 37.4 40.4 43.7 44.6

for z=69.3 cm and a=R B [mT] 0.03 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.01

Figure 19: Measured Br for r = 59.2 cm and a=R

Figure 20: Measured Br for z=62.6 cm and a=R

21

Figure 21: Measured Br for z=65.9cm and a=R

Figure 22: Measured Br for z=69.3 cm and a=R

22

3.3

Torque measurements

In the last part of the experiment, the torque induced in a current carrying coil that is placed inside of a magnetic eld was investigated. In order to do this, a small coil was placed between two Helmholtz coils which generated a constant magnetic eld. The position of the small coil was adjusted such that it was placed in the center of the system. In order to measure the torque, a dynamometer was used to measure the force that generated the torque. The error in the measurement of the force was given by the scale of the dynamometer namely F = 0.1 mN . In order for the coil to experience a magnetic moment, it was connected to a generator. Both the intensity of the current going through the Helmholtz coil system IH as well as the intensity of the current going through the small test coil IC had the same error given by the scale of the measurement namely IH = IC = 0.01 A The torque induced in the small coil was investigated with respect to three variables: the intensity of the current passing through the small coil, the intensity of the current passing through the Helmholtz coil system and the angle of deection. Dependence of deection w.r.t. the intensity of the current through the small coil IC For this part of the measurement, the intensity of the current passing through the Helmholtz coils was kept constant at IH = 2.92 A. The angle of deection was set to a value of = 90 such that the deection experienced by the coil would take the maximum value. The measured values can be examined in Table 17. Table 17: Measured values for the dependence of deection w.r.t. the current passing through the small coil IC [A] F [mN] 5.55 0.5 4.66 0.3 3.82 0.3 3.35 0.2 2.8 0.2 1.77 0.1 1.43 0.1 0.33 0

Figure 23: Dependence of deection w.r.t. the current passing through the small coil These values were then plotted in Figure 23 along with the error bars determined by the measurement of the force. It can be observed in Figure 23 that, even though the data points follow a linear trend, the 23

measurement of the deection force was not precise enough which led to a step relation between the intensity of the current and the value of the deection experienced by the coil. From Equation 5 one can see that the torque of the system is directly dependent on the deecting force inside the system. Therefore, the above conclusions are valid also when talking about the torque experienced by the small coil. Dependence of deection w.r.t. the intensity of the current passing through the Helmholtz coil IH For this part of the experiment, the current owing through the small coil was kept constant at a value of IC = 6.12 A. The angle of the small coil with respect to the magnetic eld lines was kept constant at a value of = 90 . The measured values are presented in Table 18. Table 18: Measured values for the dependence of deection w.r.t. the current passing through the Helmholtz coil system IH [A] F [mN] 0.79 0.1 1.19 0.2 1.67 0.2 1.96 0.3 2.28 0.3 2.57 0.4 2.86 0.5 3.03 0.5

Figure 24: Dependence of deection w.r.t. the current passing through the Helmholtz coils The measured values were then plotted in Figure 24. It can be observed that due to the high inaccuracy in the measurement of the deection force, the measured values appear to represent a discrete distribution rather than a continuous one. Nevertheless, as in the previous case, the linear trend is visible in the plot and with better resolution in the measurement of the deection, the directly proportional dependence between the two quantities would be more visible. Dependence of deection w.r.t. the intensity of angle of deection For the last part of the experiment, the intensity of the current passing through both the small coil as well as the intensity of the current passing through the Helmholtz coils was kept constant at the values IC = 6.06 A IH = 2.95 A

24

The value of the angle of deection was varied according to a scale on the small coil holder which had markings every 30 . Since only multiples of 30 were considered for the values of the angle, the error in the measurement of the angle does not come from the scale of the measuring instrument but rather should be considered as an approximation error with the value of 1 The measured values for this part of the experiment are presented in Table 25 and are plotted in Figure 25. As can be seen in the plot, the dependence between the two quantities follows a linear trend. Nevertheless, the inaccuracy in the measurement of the deection force is of great impact for the analysis of the trend that the values follow. Noteworthy is the fact that the values registered for the deection posses an angular symmetry. Conclusion It can be observed that the inaccuracy in the measurement of the deection force has greatly impacted the trend analysis of the measured values. A solution to this problem would be to increase the intensity of the current passing either through the Helmholtz coils or through the single coil. Nevertheless, this was not possible since the connecting wires could not withstand a higher current passing through them. Another improvement to this part of the experiment would be the use of a dierent dynamometer. Even though the dynamomenter was properly aligned before the measurements were started, a systematic error might have occurred due to friction forces that were present in the internal system of the dynamometer. Nevertheless, the linear behavior of the torque with respect to the 3 measured quantities was clearly observed. Even though the measurement of the deection force(and implicitly the torque) could have been more precise, the general behavior of the torque was in accordance to the theoretical predictions. Table 19: Measured values for the dependence of deection w.r.t. the angle of deection [deg] F [mN] 90 0.5 60 0.4 30 0.2 0 0 -30 -0.2 -60 -0.4 -90 -0.5

Figure 25: dependence of deection w.r.t. the angle of deection

25

References
1. Helmholtz coils

26