1.

Research Question

How does the average force exerted by eddy currents in an aluminium pipe vary with the magnetic
field strength of the magnets? Comment [Venkat1]: The topic of investigation
is identified and a relevant and fully focussed
research question is clearly described.
2. Introduction and Background Theory

During a visit to a museum, I witnessed a demonstration of a magnet being dropped through a

conducting pipe. To my great shock, the magnet did not fall with acceleration due to gravity, but
rather, at a much slower rate. I was surprised at how the magnet seemed to be hovering slowly in air.
After further research, I discovered that this motion was due to the phenomenon of eddy currents,
which interested me particularly because of this phenomenon’s wide applications in devices such as
eddy-current separators. My curiosity from the demonstration and interest in the phenomenon of eddy
currents made me decide to investigate the exact relationship between magnetic field strength and the
force exerted by magnets as they fall through aluminium pipes. The goals for this experiment were not Comment [Venkat2]: The evidence of personal
engagement with the exploration is clear with
only to answer my research question, but also to learn how to formulate, design and control for my independent thinking.
own experiment.
I believe the findings from this investigation will not only deepen my knowledge and understanding
of eddy currents, but may also be applicable in fields such as Magnetic Braking of vehicles, where
eddy currents are used heavily.
2.1 An explanation of the phenomenon of eddy currents
Aluminium is a non-magnetic metallic element (Is aluminium magnetic?). Due to its non-magnetic
nature, magnets of any kind are not attracted or repelled by it. However, because it is a metal, its
atoms are held together by metallic bonding in which there is a sea of free electrons. Thus, it is a good
electric conductor.
When a magnet is dropped through an aluminium pipe, there is a continuous change in the magnetic
flux because the magnet travels through the pipe while continuously changing its position with
acceleration due to gravity. Because aluminium is a good electric conductor, this rate of change in the
magnetic flux around the magnet falling through the pipe induces an electric current in the pipe, via
electromagnetic induction and Faraday’s Law (Electromagnetic induction and faradays law, 2013).
It is known that any current flowing through a conductor will create a magnetic field of its own. As
per Lenz’s law2, the current induced by the falling magnet in the aluminium pipe will have a direction
in such a way that its own magnetic field opposes the falling of the magnet through the pipe. Thus,
this current produces a force on the falling magnet that serves to decelerate the magnet’s fall. To
produce this opposing magnetic field, the current moves in a plane that is perpendicular to the original
magnet’s magnetic field. This current that is induced in the aluminium pipe is known as an eddy
current (Eddy currents ). The eddy current’s field provides a resistance to the falling magnet. Thus
there are two forces acting on the magnet, the upward force by eddy currents and the downward force
of gravity.

1
 (Magnets in a copper pipe)
2.2 Reasoning out a hypothesis using the accepted scientific context
An aluminium pipe can be likened to a coil of wire with a large number of turns. Because of this, a
magnet moving through an aluminium pipe is analogous to a magnet being moved through a coil of
wire. Thus, Faraday’s law of induction (Faraday Law of Electromagnetic Induction) can be applied to
this case:

Where:
‘E’ is the e.m.f of the current induced by the falling magnet,
‘N’ is the number of turns of wire
‘B’ is the magnetic field strength or magnetic flux density of the magnet
‘A’ is the internal area of cross-section covered by the pipe
‘t’ is time.
The formula essentially states that the induced e.m.f or, electromotive force, is equal to the number of
turns into the rate of change of the product of magnetic flux density and area through which the field
acts with time. Assuming that all variables except ‘B’ are constant, it is clear that the induced e.m.f
should increase with magnetic field strength since they are directly proportional quantities. In a
practical sense, a greater magnetic field strength will mean a greater number of magnetic flux lines
crossing through a unit area of the pipe, which will increase the rate of change of ‘B’ with time.
Since the magnitude of the induced e.m.f is larger, a larger current is induced. In the case of a magnet
falling through a pipe, this means a larger magnitude of eddy current will be produced. Thus, the force
exerted by the eddy current on the falling magnet should also increase in magnitude, since a larger
current will create a stronger magnetic field in the pipe to oppose the downward movement of the
magnet falling through it. Hence, I came to my hypothesis.
The average force exerted by eddy currents in aluminium pipes will increase as the magnetic
field strength increases. Comment [Venkat3]: The focus on the
investigation is significant.
However, the exact trends which this relation will follow were a mystery to me. For all I knew, the
average force due to eddy currents could increase at an exponential or quadratic rate with magnetic
field strength. I was really interested to mathematically model the trends to find out how exactly they
are related.
2.3 Derivation of a formula to calculate the force exerted by eddy currents in the pipe
Using my prior knowledge of Mechanics, I figured out that the force exerted on a falling magnet due
to eddy currents can be calculated using the following equations and methods:
Via the relationship (Physics - equations list ):

2
The following equation can be derived by applying this to the particular case of a magnet falling
through a pipe:

Where:
is the length of the pipe in metres
is the initial velocity of the magnet
is the time taken by the magnet to fall through the whole length of the pipe
is the acceleration of the magnet as it falls through the aluminium pipe. This acceleration is
inclusive of the acceleration due to gravity and the deceleration provided by the eddy currents.
Though it is possible that the magnet may reach a terminal velocity, it must be assumed that it is
accelerating for the purposes of this investigation.
If the magnet is assumed to be dropped from rest, so the equation becomes:

Therefore:

If we assume that the acceleration due to gravity is the literature value (Acceleration of gravity and
newton's second law) of 9.81 and that no other forces other than gravity and the resistive force due to
eddy currents act on the magnet, then the magnitude of the deceleration caused by the eddy currents is
nothing but the difference between the acceleration of the magnet due to gravity and the acceleration
of the magnet as it falls through the aluminium pipe.

Where is the magnitude of the deceleration of the magnets caused due to the eddy currents.
The average force exerted on the magnets by the eddy currents can be found by multiplying this
deceleration by the mass of the falling magnet, as per Newton’s Second Law.

Where is the average force on the falling magnet due to the eddy currents.
2.4 Variables involved Comment [Venkat4]: He is able to identify the
variables involved and shows the evidence of
Below is a table showing all the variables in the investigation: sufficient back ground studies that is made by the
Dependent Variables student.

Time taken for the magnet to fall through the pipe

Independent variable
Fixed Variables
Controlled Variables
Magnetic Field strength of the magnets
Diameter of pipes
Mass of the magnets
Thickness of the pipe
Length of the pipe
Material of the pipe (Aluminium)

3
 Uncontrolled Variables Random Chance
Position in relation to the pipe from where magnet was
dropped
Shape and size of magnets
Height above pipe from which the magnets were
dropped
Possible tilt of pipe in retort stand

3. Method and Materials Comment [Venkat5]: The methodology of

investigation is clear and the approach towards the
I procured different types of Neodymium magnets. Unfortunately, magnets of varying field strength hypothesis made is appropriate.
but constant size and shape were unavailable. Hence, I procured magnets of varying size and shape
with varying field strength for testing. I categorized these magnets into 10 different samples of
different field strength, labelled ‘A’ through ‘K’. The shape and dimensions of these samples were
also recorded.
As these magnets are very strong, they came with several safety instructions, chiefly to keep these
magnets away from electronic devices. I made sure to remove all electronic and magnetic materials
from the near vicinity of the magnets, to prevent any damage. I wore eye protection while handling
them, since they were capable of flying and hitting me if they were attracted by another magnet. I also
prevented others from being near me while I worked with the magnets, to prevent others from any risk
of injury.
To make sure that my conclusions would be almost certain, I decided to test different diameters of
aluminium pipes, since the relationship between force exerted by eddy currents and the magnetic field
strength of falling magnets should be the same regardless of the diameter. In each diameter of pipe, I
experimented with 10 different samples of varying magnetic field strength. My rationale was that if I
could obtain the same trend for all pipe diameters, the reliability and validity of my results would
increase. To this end, I tested five different diameters.
3.1 Measuring the magnetic field strength of the magnets
I obtained a magnetic field strength sensor and turned it on in the absence of any nearby magnetic
fields. It had a zero error of -2.5 gauss. I noted this value down. Next, I placed all the different
magnets so that they touched the end of the sensor, to ensure that the distance from the sensor would
not affect each magnet’s reading. I waited for the reading to stabilize to a constant value each time.
After collecting all the readings, I added 2.5 gauss to each one to offset the zero error. The collected
data can be seen in Section 4.
3.2 Measuring the masses of the magnets
I then decided to measure the masses of the different magnet sample for use in the force formula.
However, I encountered a major problem here. The sensitive electronic balance that was available in
the lab was an electronic device. I couldn’t directly place the magnets on the pan to weigh them, lest I
might permanently damage the balance. I considered other methods of measuring the mass, such as
using an analogue balance and attempting to balance the magnets’ weights with known masses.
However, this would be extremely inaccurate and could have affected my results. Since I was very
much interested in finding the answer to the research question, I did not want to accept a large
inaccuracy.

4
I came up with a different method to still use the electronic balance, but make sure it is unaffected by
the magnets. I did this by placing the magnets in foam containers and then stacking these containers
on top of wooden blocks to take them as far away from the surface of the balance as possible. The
wood and foam served to dampen the effects of the magnetic field of the magnets. I first measured the
mass of the empty containers and wood blocks, then placed the magnets into the containers and found
the new mass. I subtracted the empty mass from the mass of the containers with magnets to get the
mass of the magnets alone.

The magnets were placed in the foam box atop wooden blocks to prevent interference with the balance

3.3 Measuring the time taken for the magnets to fall through the pipes
I procured all the different diameters of aluminium pipes which were available commercially. I made
sure that all pipes had the same thickness. I then made sure that all the pipes were cut to the exact
same length. I measured it using a measuring tape to make sure: 0.61 ± 0.0005 m.
I secured the pipe vertically in a retort stand, careful to keep it as far as possible from the iron and
steel parts of the stand.
I considered many methods of measuring the time taken by the magnets to fall through the pipe,
including manual stop-watch, video analysis and time-lapse photography. I ultimately settled on the
video analysis method because it was the easiest and most accurate method available to me.
However, since some of the magnets I was using were extremely small, they were not seen in my
initial attempts to take a video. I had to zoom in on the end of the pipe and place a black chart-paper
behind it to get the right contrast and enable to falling magnet to be seen. However, now, I could not
see the moment when the magnet was dropped into the top of the pipe. So, I had to develop some sort
of visual cue. I placed my left hand within the frame of the video and as I dropped the magnet, I lifted
my left thumb. Using this cue, I was able to judge when the magnet was dropped into the pipe.

5
(Left Image)Using the visual cue in Tracker, I was able to judge when the magnet was dropped
(Right Image) By zooming the lens, the frame when the magnet exits the pipe was clearly identified.
Using ‘Tracker’ (Tracker video analysis and modelling tool for physics education) software, I was
able to precisely determine the time taken by the magnet to fall through the pipe by determining the
frame when it was dropped and the first frame when it was seen exiting the end of the pipe. It was
assumed that air resistance played no role in the motion of the magnets through the pipe.
After finding this time in Tracker, I used Microsoft Excel to perform the calculations to find the force
exerted by the eddy currents. The data are shown in Section 4. The processed values are shown in
Section 5.

4. Data Collection Comment [Venkat6]: The necessary data

collections are made and relevant to the topic
focussed.
As mentioned in Section 3, the length of the aluminium pipes used ( was measured to be 0.61 ±
0.0005 m.
The mass and magnetic field strength data of the different magnets are displayed below. For samples
A to D, the variation in the mass of container without magnet was probably due to random error like
air currents above the balance, etc. For other samples, the mass of the container was varied
intentionally to prevent excessive mass from being placed on the balance, which could have caused
damage.
Mass of container Mass of
Magnet Magnetic Field and container Mass of
Sample Strength(±0.000 magnet(±0.001 without magnet. magnet(±0.000002
name 001 Tesla)/ Tesla g) / g (±0.001 g) / g kg)/ kg
A 0.046769 229.541 228.384 0.001157
B 0.111293 232.048 228.377 0.003671
C 0.153936 234.172 228.371 0.005801
D 0.173944 236.467 228.368 0.008099
E 0.184265 238.487 221.626 0.016861
F 0.036086 226.641 226.265 0.000376
G 0.064365 235.936 226.267 0.009669
I 0.059266 199.817 198.377 0.00144
J 0.067065 205.579 198.376 0.007203
K 0.163694 301.168 295.292 0.005876

6
The time taken for each different magnet to fall through pipes of different diameters is recorded
below. Certain cells are left empty as some of the magnet samples tested could not be fit into the
pipes.
Time taken Time taken Time taken Time taken Time taken
to fall to fall to fall to fall to fall
Magnetic Field through through through through through
Strength 0.006m 0.009m 0.012m 0.016m 0.021m
Magnet Sample (±0.000001 pipe (± pipe(± pipe(± pipe(± pipe(±
name Tesla)/ Tesla 0.001s) /s 0.001s)/s 0.001s)/s 0.001s)/s 0.001s)/s
A 0.046769 4.538 0.601 0.501
B 0.111293 8.308 0.934 0.567
C 0.153936 9.142 2.002 0.801
D 0.173944 11.612 2.369 0.935
E 0.184265 1.234 1.067
F 0.036086 5.639 1.668 0.801 0.634 0.601
G 0.064365 1.134 0.667 0.633 0.434 0.433
I 0.059266 5.105 3.104 2.035 0.701 0.467
J 0.067065 1.268 1.101 0.767 0.467 0.534
K 0.163694 5.839 1.802 1.132
5. Data Processing and Analysis

The formula derived in the section 3.2 was utilised to calculate the force exerted by the eddy currents
for each magnet. The calculation was entered into Microsoft Excel, using the previously tabulated
time and mass data as variables in the equation. There were no significant qualitative observations
made.
For example:

The uncertainties were propagated using conventional rules of propagation.

For example:

As per convention, the uncertainties are expressed to 1 significant figure and the values are expressed
to the same number of decimal places as the uncertainty. The resulting table is shown below:
Magnetic
Field Average force on Average force on Average force on Average force on Average force on
Strength magnet by eddy magnet by eddy magnet by eddy magnet by eddy magnet by eddy
(±0.000001 currents in 0.006 m currents in 0.009 m currents in 0.012 currents in 0.016 currents in 0.021 m
Tesla)/ Tesla pipe / N pipe / N m pipe / N m pipe / N pipe / N
0.046769 0.01128±0.00003 0.00744±0.00004 0.00573±0.00004
0.111293 0.03595±0.00006 0.0309±0.0001 0.0221±0.0001
0.153936 0.05682±0.00008 0.0551±0.0001 0.0459±0.0002
0.173944 0.0794±0.0001 0.0777±0.0001 0.06815±0.00002
0.184265 0.1519±0.0003 0.1473±0.0004
0.036086 0.00367±0.00002 0.00352±0.00003 0.00297±0.00003 0.00260±0.00002 0.00242±0.00002
0.064365 0.0857±0.0002 0.0683±0.0003 0.0654±0.0003 0.0322±0.0002 0.0319±0.0002

7
 0.0137
0.059266 0.01406±0.00004 0.01394±0.00004 0±0.00004 0.01055±0.00005 0.00607±0.00004
0.067065 0.0652±0.0002 0.0634±0.0002 0.0557±0.0002 0.03036±0.0002 0.03984±0.0002
0.163694 0.05743±0.00006 0.0554±0.0001 0.0521±0.0002

To better understand the trends involved, five different graphs were plotted, each one for a particular
diameter of pipe used. Trend lines were mathematically modelled via Least-Squares Regression
(4.1.4.1. Linear Least Squares Regression) using Excel. Though the error bars have been plotted, they
are extremely small and not visible on the graphs.

Fig.1: 0.006m diameter Fig.2: 0.009m diameter

Aluminium pipe Aluminium pipe
0.4 0.35
Average force due to eddy currents/
Average force due to eddy currents/

y = 2.5257x - 0.093
0.35 0.3 y = 2.2061x - 0.0808
R² = 0.888 R² = 0.9548
0.3 0.25
0.25
0.2
0.2
0.15
0.15
N
N

0.1 0.1
0.05 0.05
0 0
-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Magnetic Field Strength/ Tesla
Magnetic Field Strength/ Tesla

Fig.3: 0.012m diameter Fig.4: 0.016m diameter

Aluminium pipe Aluminium pipe
0.09 0.16
y = 0.36x + 0.0075 y = 0.632x - 0.0208
Average force due to eddy currents/
Average force due to eddy currents/

0.08 0.14
R² = 0.5396 R² = 0.713
0.07 0.12
0.06
0.1
0.05
0.08
0.04
0.03 0.06
N
N

0.02 0.04
0.01 0.02
0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Magnetic Field Strength/ Tesla Magnetic Field Strength/ Tesla

8
 Fig.5: 0.021m diameter
Aluminium pipe
0.16
y = 0.5778x - 0.0184
Average force due to eddy

0.14
R² = 0.6359
0.12
0.1
currents/ N

0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Magnetic Field Strength/ Tesla

All trend-lines were observed to slope upwards. To quantitatively measure how well the respective
trend-lines fit the data, the correlation-coefficient (Calculating R-squared) or R2 values for each trend-
line were calculated. This value is an indication of how well the trend-line fits the data, with 1
indicating a perfect fit and 0 indicating no fit. Fig.1 and Fig.2 were found to have high R2 values,
above 0.8, which indicate a strong fit. Fig.3, Fig.4 and Fig.5 were found to have lower R2 values of
0.5 to 0.75, indicating a moderate fit.
In Fig.3 and Fig.5, I noticed that the points with Magnetic Field Strength of 0.064365T (Sample J)
and 0.067065T (Sample G) seemed to be outliers. I also noticed that in Fig.3, Fig.4 and Fig.5, the
point with field strength of 0.184264T (Sample E) seemed to be an outlier.
Additionally, it was noted that best fit trend-line of all the graphs had extremely low y-intercept values
and hence seemed to almost pass through origin. The largest y-intercept value observed was -0.093N
which is quite negligible and hence close to 0.

6. Evaluation and Discussion Comment [Venkat7]: The presentation is worth

reading with a right evaluation has been made in
regard to the hypothesis.
6.1 Limitations and drawbacks of the investigation

This investigation was prone to some errors that may have affected the graphs obtained and caused the
presence of the outlier data points. Upon further analysis of the data, it was found that Sample E,
which was noted as an outlier, was cuboidal in shape while the other magnets were all cylindrical.
Additionally, it was found that the other two outliers noted, Sample J and Sample G, were cylinders
with much smaller radii and longer length than the other samples tested. Hence, it is probable that the
shape of the magnets plays a role in the formation of eddy currents and hence affected the findings.
Had it been possible to procure and test magnets of the same shape but varying magnetic field
strength, the findings may have followed a perfectly linear trend, which could have enabled a stronger
conclusion.
Additionally, the uncontrolled variables, like the exact height above the pipe from where the magnet
was dropped and the position of the magnet in relation to the pipe (centred or off-centred), could have
introduced significant random error into the results. Furthermore, though the time for each magnet to
fall through the pipe was measured using video analysis, there might have still been significant error

9
because in many cases, the exact frame when the magnet first exited the pipe could not be identified.
Furthermore, it is quite possible that the pipes may have been slightly tilted while in the retort stands,
so the magnets might not have fallen perfectly vertically.
Another potential cause of random error is the validity of all the underlying assumptions (indicated in
the previous sections by the word “assume” or “assumed”). For instance, it was assumed that the
magnets were accelerating as they travelled through the pipe, though they could have been travelling
at a constant velocity if the force of the eddy currents was equal to their weight.
The length of the pipes could have been increased so that the magnet would travel through them for a
longer time and the time taken for them to fall through could be more accurate.
6.1 Positive aspects

The experiment was rather quick and easy to perform. The trends obtained after taking out outliers
have very high correlation coefficients and all have the same sign and linear nature. The absolute
uncertainties for all data points are extremely small. In fact, when I converted the absolute
uncertainties to percentage uncertainties for the “average force due to eddy currents” data, the highest
percentage uncertainty was 1.01%, with most uncertainties being less than 1%. These are extremely
small uncertainties, which increase the strength of my conclusions.

7. Conclusion and Future Study Comment [Venkat8]: The use of subject

terminology is perfect and any errors does not
affect the process and understanding of the analysis
All graphs plotted between average force exerted by eddy currents and the magnetic field strength of as a whole.
magnets have an upward-sloping trend. These results confirm my hypothesis (refer section 2.2) that
the average force exerted by eddy currents on the falling magnet increases with the magnetic field
strength of the falling magnet. Hence, my results fit-in with the accepted scientific context and this
provides additional validity to them.

The trend-lines for all the graphs, were plotted as straight-lines. The R2 values calculated for Fig.1 and
Fig.2 were very high for the straight-line trend, indicating a very strong fit. Fig.3, Fig.4 and Fig.5 had
much lower R2 values, indicating that the straight line was not a very good fit for this data. This lower
R2 value is caused because of the outlier points identified; possibly caused due to the different shape
of these magnets. However, these outliers cannot simply be discarded. Hence, the exact trend between
magnetic field strength and the average force exerted by the eddy currents cannot be known from this
data, though the graphs seem to suggest a linear trend.

During the course of this investigation, I formulated the procedure, designed the setups and
propagated uncertainties and accounted for errors. Thus, I fulfilled all the aims of the exploration.

This investigation can be improved in the future to determine an exact trend. Magnet samples of the
same shape and size but different field strength could be tested, which could lead to a definitive linear
trend without many outliers. Longer lengths of aluminium pipe can be used. Each trial can be
performed a number of times, and the average time taken for the magnet to fall through the pipe could
be taken. More accurate measuring devices, like a slow motion camera or light gates could also be
used for more accurate results. More pipes with the same thickness but different diameters can be

10
obtained so that more readings can be collected. Also, one could use a measuring device to check
whether the pipes are perfectly vertical in the retort stand.
Potential extensions may include investigating whether the shape of the magnet or the material that
the pipe is made of play a role in the magnitude of the induced eddy currents. Using the presently-
available data, the graphs could be plotted between the diameter of the pipe and the average force
exerted due to eddy currents so that the relationship between these two variables can be found. The
trend-lines of graphs between the diameter of the pipe and the average force exerted by the eddy
currents can be extrapolated to find at what diameter the eddy currents no longer have any effect on
the magnet’s fall.

Criterion Assessed Maximum Earned

marks marks
Personal Engagement 2 2
Exploration 6 5
Analysis 6 6
Evaluation 6 6
Communication 4 3
TOTAL 24 22

11
 References
4.1.4.1. Linear Least Squares Regression. (n.d.). Retrieved January 17, 2016, from
http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmd/section1/pmd141.htm
Acceleration of Gravity and Newton's Second Law. (n.d.). Retrieved January 16, 2016, from
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/accelaration-gravity-d_340.html
Calculating R-squared [Video file]. (n.d.). Retrieved January 10, 2016, from
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/probability/regression/regression-
correlation/v/calculating-r-squared
Eddy Currents. (n.d.). Retrieved January 17, 2016, from
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=eddy-currents
Electromagnetic Induction and Faradays Law. (2013). Retrieved January 16, 2016, from
http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/electromagnetic-induction.html
Faraday Law of Electromagnetic Induction. (n.d.). Retrieved January 15, 2015, from
http://www.electrical4u.com/faraday-law-of-electromagnetic-induction/
Is Aluminum Magnetic? (n.d.). Retrieved January 15, 2016, from
http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~wbreslyn/magnets/is-aluminium-magnetic.html
Magnets in a Copper Pipe. (n.d.). Retrieved January 14, 2016, from
http://www.explorabox.org/activities/electricity-and-magnetism-2/eddy-currents/

PHYSICS - equations list. (n.d.). Retrieved January 16, 2016, from

https://sentynel.com/media/old/equations.html
Tracker Video Analysis and Modeling Tool for Physics Education. (n.d.). Retrieved December 20,
2015, from http://physlets.org/tracker/

12