Static Repelling Force Between Two Axially Magnetized Ring Magnets

University Scholars Day 2008, Honors College, University of North Texas (UNT), Denton, TX April 3, 2008

Jerod C. Day, Alex D. Rowen, Joshua A. Goldstrom, Maksim Vakulenko, and Matthew J. Traum, Ph.D.* Thermal Fluid Sciences
Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, College of Engineering
University of North Texas, PO Box 311089 Denton, TX 76203 Group @ UNT
*Author to Whom Correspondence Should Be Addressed: mtraum@unt.edu, (940) 565-3446 A Student Centered Research Lab

Abstract Background and Theory Hypothesis and Methods

The Kundel Magnetic Cog (US Patent 7,151,332),
currently a decimeter-scale device, translates linear
motion into rotational motion and vice versa using only
permanent magnets. If miniaturized to millimeter scale
and coupled with a powered linear oscillator or
actuator, the Kundel Cog would provide efficient
rotation to drive meso-scale devices like aircraft
propellers, servos or power trains. We are creating the
first quantitative magneto-dynamic model describing
performance of the Kundel Cog and assessing its
viability for miniaturization. Quantitative assessment of
permanent magnet field strength is a critical first step in
design for miniaturization. As a prelude to the dynamic
model, a static experiment has been devised to measure
B-field strength of permanent magnets slated for use in
a decimeter-scale prototype Kundel Cog.
Experimentally measured forces imposed by one
permanent magnet upon another will be compared
against manufacturer-specified B-fields.
The goals of this research are to 1) determine the force of interaction
and B-field strengths of two axially magnetized Neodymium-Iron-Boron
(NdFeB) magnets for use in the Kundel Magnetic Cog and 2) to derive a
quantitative analytical model to accurately predict the force of interaction.
The Kundel Magnetic Cog uses permanent magnets mounted on a linear
actuating shaft to turn a set of apposing permanent magnets mounted on a
rotating shaft (Figure 1). NdFeB magnets are used because their ability to
resist demagnetization is superior to conventional ferrites and other
magnets[1]. In addition, they have high magnetic flux density compared to
conventional magnets, enabling more simplified and optimized designs[1].
Finding the force of interaction between two ring-shaped magnets is a
key step in developing a quantitative mathematical model of the Kundel
Cog. Literature information concerning magnetic field interactions of
axially magnetized permanent ring magnets is limited. We derived an
expression to estimate the force between two axially aligned ring magnets
by modifying the equation for force between two cylindrical magnets[2].
Our model treats the ring magnets as if they are made up of a ring of
cylindrical magnets aligned in a perfect circle with no interaction between
the cylindrical magnets making up the ring (Figure 2).
The factory-specified B-field strength of N45H rated ring magnets used in the
experiment is between 1.32 T and 1.36 T[3]. Our theoretical equation for force between
two axially magnetized ring magnets (Equation 1) is derived such that N (Equation 2)
is the number of imaginary disks making up the ring magnet (Figure 2), m (Equation 3)
is the magnetic moment of each cylindrical magnet, x is the separation between magnet
faces, and h is the thickness of the magnets.
We hypothesize that the data collected from the static magnet experiment will
closely match our theoretical ring magnet force equation. The experiment (Figure 4)
consists of a ½” OD shaft of aluminum, used to eliminate magnetic field amplification,
mounted in a wood base to align the axis of the ring magnets for accurate B-field
measurements. The stationary base magnet is placed around the aluminum shaft and
centered on the wood base using Teflon tape. The traveling magnet is placed above the
base magnet with like poles facing. Several glass and plastic tubes with ½“ ID are used
as weights to decrease the distance between the magnets’ faces. After the initial
separation between the magnets is recorded, glass weights are added one at a time, and
separation distance is recorded as a function of mass. Glass weight masses were
measured individually using a Mettler-Toledo XP5003S delta range precision balance
with an accuracy of ±0.001
±0 001 grams,
grams and an aluminum ruler with an accuracy of ±0.5±0 5
millimeters was used to measure magnet separation distances.

Results and Conclusions Figures

Experimental results are given in Figure 3 juxtaposed against the model prediction of Equation 1. The theoretical 0.3

minimum and maximum forces obtained using Equation 1 are shown based on the range of B-field strengths 0.275

≈
provided by the manufacturer: 1.32 T and 1.37 T. Note, especially the accuracy with which Equation 1 predicts the 0.25

force with separation between 0.012

0 012 m and 0.016
0 016 m.
m The experimental data deviates slightly from Equation 1 as 0.225

separation increases from .016 m. Possible sources of experimental error include static friction between inside of the 0.2

glass tubing and outside of the aluminum shaft, slight misalignment of the center axis of the two ring magnets, and 0.175

Mass (kg)
slight vertical misalignment of the shaft. The shaft was found to vary from 0.6 to 1.0 degrees from the vertical. 0.15 Figure 2: Arrangement of disk
Figure 1: Permanent magnet arrangement in magnets used in Equation 1 to
The model-experiment deviation could also be explained by very small B-field “dead spots” caused by summing the Kundel Magnetic Cog. Image courtesy
0.125

magnetic fields of the theoretical cylindrical magnets or caused by the rounding, necessary for summation, of 0.1 represent a ring magnet.
of http://www.kundelmagnetics.com [4].
Equation 2. Nonetheless, we conclude that Equation 1 was successful in predicting the far field force between two 0.075
Experimental
axially magnetized ring magnets to an acceptable degree of accuracy for engineering modeling. 0.05
Theoretical MIN
0.025
Theoretical MAX
Future Plans 0

0.011
0.012
0.013
0.014
0.015
0.016
0.017
0.018
0.019
0.020
0.021
0.022
0.023
0.024
0.025
0.026
0.027
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.031
0.032
0.033
0.034
0.035
0.036
0.037
0.038
0.039
0.040
0.041
0.042
0.043
0.044
0.045
0.046
0.047
0.048
0.049
Having derived a successful theoretical model to calculate static force between two axially magnetized ring Equation 1: Approximate force between two axially
Separation (m)
magnets, we will now continue experiments to find the dynamic force between two ring magnets. A complete magnetized ring magnets. Figure 3: Total suspended mass versus magnet face separation.
magneto-dynamic model will enable assessment of viability for Kundel Magnetic Cog miniaturization.
Equation 2: Number
References and Acknowledgements of cylindrical magnets
occupying a ring
1. Rahman, M. A., Slemon, G. R., “Promsing Applications of Neodynium Boron Iron Magnets in Electrical magnet.
Machines,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. MAG-21, No. 5, pp. 1712-1716, September 1985.
2. Castaner, R., Medina, J. M., Cuesta-Bolao, M. J., “The magnetic dipole interaction as measured by spring
dynamometer,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 74, pp 510-513, June 2006. Equation 3: Magnetic
3. OeMag International Co. Web site, http://www.oemag.com/materials/01.htm, last accessed 03/30/2008. moment of cylindrical
4. Kundel Magnetics Web site, http://www.kundelmagnetics.com , last accessed 04/02/2008. permanent magnet.
* The authors acknowledge Dr. Mitty Plummer for his assistance in building the apparatus used in this research. Figure 4: The apparatus used for ring magnet static force testing.