Next Article in Journal
Analytical Solutions of Symmetric Isotropic Spin Clusters Using Spin and Point Group Projectors
Previous Article in Journal
The Influence of the Design and Technological Parameters of Polymer-Based Multipolar Magnets with SrFeO Hard Magnetic Filler on the Residual Magnetic Properties
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Update to The Demagnetizing Factor Dataset Calculated for The General Ellipsoid by Osborn

Institute for Solid State Physics and Optics, HUN-REN Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Konkoly-Thege M. út 29-33, H-1121 Budapest, Hungary
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Magnetism 2024, 4(3), 173-182; https://doi.org/10.3390/magnetism4030012
Submission received: 13 May 2024 / Revised: 24 June 2024 / Accepted: 27 June 2024 / Published: 30 June 2024

Abstract

:
The exact formulae for calculating the demagnetizing factors of a general ellipsoid along the three main axes abc have been long known. According to these formulae, the demagnetizing factors depend only on the axial ratios b/a and c/a. Although the calculation of the demagnetizing factors is a straightforward task, the calculation itself is not a simple one. Therefore, tabular and graphical representations of these demagnetizing factor data have also been presented which can then be used for approximating the demagnetizing factors of a rectangular ferromagnetic slab with the same axial ratios. It turned out in our recent study, however, that, in some ranges of axial ratios (e.g., for very small c/a values), the available tables and graphs do not provide sufficient resolution for obtaining the demagnetizing factors with reasonable accuracy. It was decided to calculate these missing values, and they are presented here in both tabular and graphical form by giving instructions for how to obtain conveniently further interpolated data. In addition, the previous and current demagnetizing factor data have been replotted and fitted to a polynomial function with high accuracy. The functional form of these fitting polynomials is presented in a table for the whole range of the axial ratios b/a and c/a. By graphically displaying these functions, one can obtain, in a relatively simple manner, the demagnetizing factors of a general ellipsoid with known axial ratios without the need to directly calculate through the exact formulae. This may be helpful in obtaining a quick estimate for the demagnetizing factors of any rectangular ferromagnetic slab of interest.

1. Introduction

The determination of the anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) [1,2] requires the measurement of the field dependence of the resistivity in the configurations when the magnetic field H is parallel to the measuring current (this is called longitudinal magnetoresistance, LMR) and when H is perpendicular to the current (this is the transverse magnetoresistance, TMR). The measurement of the MR(H) curves can be conveniently carried out on thin strip-shaped samples with a current flowing along the long axis of the strip, and the magnetic field H is oriented in the strip plane either parallel or perpendicular to the current flow direction [3].
It turned out, in some recent MR studies of various ferromagnetic materials [4,5,6,7,8], that the shape and width of the low-field LMR(H) and TMR(H) curves were similar for some of the samples whereas they were distinctly different for other samples. The strip-shaped foil samples for the MR(H) measurements were typically 5 to 10 mm long, 1 to 2 mm wide, and 10 to 50 μm thick. In order to reveal the origin of the observed differences in the LMR(H) and TMR(H) curves, magnetization (M) measurements have been subsequently performed [9] on similar strip-shaped samples. These M(H) studies [9] revealed that the differences between the longitudinal and transverse configurations can be well explained by demagnetizing field effects. Two examples are shown in Figure 1 where the magnetization is displayed as a function of the external magnetic field for a cold-rolled Ni50Co50 strip and an electrodeposited nanocrystalline (nc) Ni strip, with the magnetic field oriented in the strip plane parallel (ML) and transverse (MT) to the longest edge. These samples have the largest and smallest thickness/length ratio, respectively, showing the huge effect of sample geometry on the transverse magnetization curves. The detailed evaluation of the M(H) study to be published elsewhere [9] necessitated a thorough consideration of the demagnetizing factors for such strip-shaped samples, and this was a major motivation for the present work.
From the viewpoint of the demagnetizing effects, the strip-shaped thin foil samples can be considered as a rectangular ferromagnetic slab which, on the other hand, can be approximated by a general ellipsoid. The exact formulae for calculating the demagnetizing factors of a general ellipsoid along the three main axes abc have been long known [10,11]. According to these formulae, the demagnetizing factors depend only on the axial ratios b/a and c/a. Osborn [10] presented a tabular and graphical representation of the demagnetizing factor data for the general ellipsoid which was then complemented with some further data by Cronemeyer [12].
It should be noted that, following the work of Osborn [10], Stoner [11], and Cronemeyer [12], numerous further studies (see, e.g., Refs. [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]) have been carried out for calculating the demagnetizing factors of both the general ellipsoid and its specific forms and also various rectangular or circular ferromagnetic slabs, such as rods and disks, by accounting in numerous cases also for the fact that, in not perfectly ellipsoidal objects, the magnetization distribution within the specimen is not homogeneous, in contrast to the general ellipsoid. However, by looking at these reports [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21], it turned out that, whereas they are really useful for the specific cases considered, e.g., for infinite cylinders or rods, the results cannot be straightforwardly applied to the strip-shaped samples with the axial ratios of our interest.
Therefore, we have found it more useful to follow the scheme to rely on the formulae of Osborn [10] and Stoner [11] to directly calculate the required demagnetizing factors of interest for our study. Namely, it turned out that the approximation of a rectangular ferromagnetic slab with a general ellipsoid having the same axial ratios is a fairly good approach since direct experimental determinations of the demagnetizing factors of rectangular slab samples [9,14] have demonstrated a not-too-large deviation. As noted above, such a deviation arises due to the fact that, even in a homogeneous external magnetic field, the magnetization orientation is homogeneous only in a body having the shape of a general ellipsoid. Therefore, in a rectangular slab, the magnetization orientation is inhomogeneous to some extent around the edges [14] as a result of which the effective demagnetizing factor will be somewhat different [9,14] than that calculated for a general ellipsoid having the same axial ratios. The recent magnetic measurements [9] revealed that the experimental demagnetizing factor Nb when the magnetic field is oriented along the slab edge b is about 8% larger only than the Nb value calculated for the corresponding general ellipsoid.
It is, therefore, useful to have available detailed data for the demagnetizing factors of the general ellipsoid for the whole range of axial ratios. It turned out, however, in our recent study [9], that, in some ranges of axial ratios (e.g., for very small c/a values), the available tables and graphs [10,12] do not provide sufficient resolution for obtaining the demagnetizing factors with reasonable accuracy. The two samples shown in Figure 1 correspond to the smallest and largest c/a values (c/a = 0.00074 for nc-Ni and c/a = 0.01533 for Ni50Co50) in our recent work [9]. Thus, the c/a values for our samples fall just in the range where the demagnetizing factors cannot be obtained with reasonable accuracy from previously existing sources.
It was decided, therefore, to calculate these missing values, and they are presented here in both tabular and graphical form by giving instructions for how to conveniently obtain further interpolated data. In addition, the previous and current demagnetizing factor data [10,12] have been replotted and fitted to a polynomial function with high accuracy. The functional form of these fitting polynomials is presented in a table for the whole range of the axial ratios b/a and c/a. By graphically displaying these functions, one can obtain, in a relatively simple manner, the demagnetizing factors of a general ellipsoid with known axial ratios without the need to directly calculate through the exact formulae. This may be helpful in obtaining a quick estimate for the demagnetizing factors of any rectangular ferromagnetic slab of interest.

2. Demagnetizing Factors of the General Ellipsoid

The magnetic induction inside a ferromagnetic specimen is given by the general expression [22]
B = HNM + 4πM
where H is the external magnetic field and N is the demagnetizing factor (we use here the CGS system). Strictly speaking, this expression is valid only for a homogeneously magnetized specimen in the form of a general ellipsoid. In this case, the demagnetizing field Hd is also uniform within the specimen and is proportional to the magnetization: Hd = −NM; and this appears in Expression (1). The demagnetizing factor is a scalar quantity along the three main axes abc of the ellipsoid, and for the three demagnetizing factors, the relation
Na + Nb + Nc = 4π
holds. Osborn [10] and Stoner [11] have provided exact formulae for the calculation of the demagnetizing factors of the general ellipsoid.
As outlined in the Introduction, a general ellipsoid will be used for approximating the demagnetizing factors of a rectangular slab shown in Figure 2. In this approach, we will approximate the slab with a corresponding inscribed general ellipsoid having the same full axis lengths as the edges of the rectangular slab. (Since the demagnetizing factors depend only on the axial ratios b/a and c/a, any general ellipsoid with the same axial ratios is an equally appropriate approximation, the term “inscribed“ does not represent any restriction, and the same is valid whether the parameters a, b and c are defined as full axes or semiaxes.)

3. New Calculated Data for the Demagnetizing Factors of the General Ellipsoid

As noted in the Introduction, Osborn [10] and Cronemeyer [12] presented tabular values and graphical representations of the dependence of the demagnetizing factors of the general ellipsoid on the axial ratios c/a and b/a for a wide range of the axial ratios. Unfortunately, no useful data were included in these works [10,12] for axial ratios c/a < 0.1. For completing these missing data, by using formulae (2.1)–(2-3) from Osborn [10], we have calculated a set of N/4π values in this c/a range for b/a values of integer multiples of 0.1, and these values are collected in Table 1.

4. A Useful Graphical Representation of the Demagnetizing Factor Data for the General Ellipsoid

In order to provide help for obtaining N values for more c/a and b/a values than available in the published tables and graphs [10,12] and in the present Table 1, it was found useful to replot the available data. Therefore, we have prepared graphs of Na/4π and Nb/4π as a function of c/a for all values of b/a for which data are available. The datasets N/4π vs. c/a obtained in this manner were fitted for each available value of b/a to a polynomial under the constraint that the polynomial should be zero (N = 0) at c/a = 0.
Examples of these graphs are shown in Figure 3 for the demagnetizing factor Na/4π and in Figure 4 for Nb/4π. These graphs demonstrate that the available Na and Nb data for b/a = 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 can be fitted to a fourth-order polynomial with a very good fit quality. The same order of polynomial was sufficient to obtain similarly good fits for Na and Nb with b/a = 0.4 to 1.0. The fit quality R2 was at least 0.9999 or even higher for all the fits. The parameters of the polynomial fitting functions are collected in Table 2.
By using these fitting functions, one can now display the demagnetizing factors as a function of c/a for several fixed values of b/a which fall close to the b/a value of the rectangular slab sample of interest. Such plots can now be easily created even for the range of extremely small c/a values which cannot be resolved properly in the graphs presented by Osborn [10]. The good quality of fits ensures that we can reliably estimate the N data in the whole range of c/a values.
Since the b/a values of actual samples are always somewhat different from the fixed b/a values selected as integral multiples of 0.1 only, one should make a non-linear interpolation for actual b/a values in between the displayed polynomial curves in order to obtain a good N value for a given c/a value. We can see, for example, from Table 1, that for c/a = 0.1, we find that Nb/4π = 0.4899 for b/a = 0.1, Nb/4π = 0.3183 for b/a = 0.2, and Nb/4π = 0.2322 for b/a = 0.3. One easily finds that the difference in the Nb/4π values between b/a = 0.1 and b/a = 0.2 is almost precisely a factor of two larger than that between b/a = 0.2 and b/a = 0.3 (0.1716 and 0.0861, respectively). This implies that the Nb/4π value for b/a = 0.15 can be safely obtained by taking a subdivision at a ratio of 2:1 between the N values for b/a = 0.1 and b/a = 0.2, and then we end up with Nb/4π = 0.3755 for b/a = 0.15 at c/a = 0.1. With a similar non-linear interpolation, one can straightforwardly obtain Nb data for any further intermediate b/a values by using Figure 4. The same procedure can also be used for interpolating Na data with the help of graphs like Figure 3.
Furthermore, the data summarized in Table 2 can be utilized in another manner. Namely, an inspection of the coefficients k1, k2, k3, and k4 quickly reveals that each coefficient varies fairly smoothly and monotonously with the axial ratio b/a, and this gives us a chance to easily obtain demagnetizing factors for any arbitrary b/a value. For this purpose, we have plotted the coefficients k1, k2, k3, and k4 as a function of b/a in Figure 5 for Na and in Figure 6 for Nb. With the help of the gridlines, from these plots, one can make a fairly good reading of all four coefficients for the actual b/a value of the sample of interest. Then, by inserting these values into the fitting equation y = f(x) = k4x4 + k3x3 + k2x2+ k1x together with the actual x = c/a value of the sample, one can directly obtain the Na and Nb values for any b/a and c/a values with sufficient accuracy.

5. Summary

In the present paper, demagnetizing factor data are reported for the general ellipsoid, which were missing in previous works [10,12]. In addition, all available demagnetizing factor data of the general ellipsoid were displayed as a function of the axial ratio c/a and fitted by a polynomial for each b/a value. The parameters of the fitting polynomials are provided here from which a graphical representation of the demagnetizing factors can be easily created. Some hints were also provided for obtaining interpolated values not displayed. An advantage of the suggested procedure is that one can obtain a good value for the demagnetizing factor values also in axial ratio ranges not available in previous reports [10,12]. It is hoped that the present paper will be useful for quickly obtaining a reliable estimate of the demagnetizing factors for a rectangular slab of interest.

Author Contributions

Herewith, we declare that the work described has neither been published nor is under consideration for publication elsewhere and that its publication is approved by all authors. L.F.K.: writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, investigation, formal analysis, data curation, conceptualization. I.B.: writing—review and editing, writing—original draft, formal analysis, conceptualization. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The HUN-REN Wigner Research Centre for Physics utilizes the research infrastructure of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. We are indebted to E. Tóth-Kádár for preparing the electrodeposited Ni foil and L.K. Varga for providing the Ni50Co50 foil. The authors are indebted to one of the reviewers for drawing attention to the possibility of utilizing the fitting coefficients in the manner displayed in Figure 5 and Figure 6.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. McGuire, T.R.; Potter, R.I. Anisotropic magnetoresistance in ferromagnetic 3d alloys. IEEE Trans. Magn. 1975, 11, 1018–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Campbell, I.A.; Fert, A. Chapter 9 Transport Properties of Ferromagnets. In Handbook of Ferromagnetic Materials; Wohlfarth, E.P., Ed.; North-Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherland, 1982; Volume 3. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bakonyi, I. Guidelines for the evaluation of magnetotransport parameters from measurements on thin strip-shaped samples of bulk metallic ferromagnets with finite residual resistivity. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2018, 133, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Isnaini, V.A.; Kolonits, T.; Czigány, Z.; Gubicza, J.; Zsurzsa, S.; Varga, L.K.; Tóth-Kádár, E.; Pogány, L.; Péter, L.; Bakonyi, I. Room-temperature magnetoresistance of nanocrystalline Ni metal with various grain sizes. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2020, 135, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bakonyi, I.; Czeschka, F.D.; Kiss, L.F.; Isnaini, V.A.; Krupp, A.T.; Palotás, K.; Zsurzsa, S.; Péter, L. High-field magnetoresistance of microcrystalline and nanocrystalline Ni metal at 3 K and 300 K. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2022, 137, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. El-Tahawy, M.; Péter, L.; Kiss, L.F.; Gubicza, J.; Czigány, Z.; Molnár, G.; Bakonyi, I. Anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) of cobalt: hcp-Co vs. fcc-Co. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2022, 560, 169660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. El-Tahawy, M.; Péter; Gubicza, J.; Molnár, G.; Li, C.; Vitos, L.; Bakonyi, I. Metastable Phase Formation in Electrodeposited Co-Rich Co-Cu and Co-Ni Alloys. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2023, 170, 062507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bakonyi, I.; Czeschka, F.D.; Isnaini, V.A.; Krupp, A.T.; Gubicza, J.; Varga, L.K.; Péter, L. High-field magnetoresistance measurements on Ni75Co25 and Ni40Co60 alloys at 3 K and 300 K. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2024, 591, 171683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kiss, L.F.; Varga, L.K.; Gubicza, J.; Péter, L.; Bakonyi, I. Influence of demagnetizing effects on the magnetization curves of finite-size rectangular slabs (in preparation).
  10. Osborn, J.A. Demagnetizing Factors of the General Ellipsoid. Phys. Rev. 1945, 67, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Stoner, E.C. XCVII. The demagnetizing factors for ellipsoids. Philos. Mag. 1945, 36, 803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cronemeyer, D.C. Demagnetization factors for general ellipsoids. J. Appl. Phys. 1991, 70, 2911–2914, Erratum in J. Appl. Phys. 1991, 70, 7660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chen, D.-X.; Brug, J.A.; Goldfarb, R.B. Demagnetizing factors for cylinders. IEEE Trans. Magn. 1991, 27, 3601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zheng, G.; Pardavi-Horváth, M.; Huang, X.; Keszei, B.; Vandlik, J. Experimental determination of an effective demagnetization factor for nonellipsoidal geometries. J. Appl. Phys. 1996, 79, 5742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Aharoni, A. Demagnetizing factors for rectangular ferromagnetic prisms. J. Appl. Phys. 1998, 83, 3432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pardavi-Horvath, M. Shape and size effects in nanostructured 2D magnetic systems. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 1999, 198–199, 219–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chen, D.-X.; Pardo, E.; Sanchez, A. Demagnetizing factors of rectangular prisms and ellipsoids. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2002, 38, 1742–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chen, D.-X.; Prados, C.; Pardo, E.; Sanchez, A.; Hernando, A. Transverse demagnetizing factors of long rectangular bars: I. Analytical expressions for extreme values of susceptibility. J. Appl. Phys. 2002, 91, 5254–5259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chen, D.-X.; Pardo, E.; Sanchez, A. Demagnetizing factors for rectangular prisms. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2005, 41, 2077–2088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Beleggia, M.; De Graef, M.; Millev, Y. Demagnetization factors of the general ellipsoid: An alternative to the Maxwell approach. Philos. Mag. 2006, 86, 2451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Smith, A.; Nielsen, K.K.; Christensen, D.V.; Bahl, C.R.H.; Bjørk, R.; Hattel, J. The demagnetizing field of a nonuniform rectangular prism. J. Appl. Phys. 2010, 107, 103910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cullity, B.D.; Graham, C.D. Introduction to Magnetic Materials, 2nd ed.; IEEE Press–Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009; p. 54. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Magnetization M as a function of external magnetic field H for a cold-rolled Ni50Co50 strip and an electrodeposited nanocrystalline (nc) Ni strip, with in-plane magnetic field oriented parallel (ML, black and red curves for Ni50Co50 and nc-Ni, respectively) and transverse (MT, green and blue curves for Ni50Co50 and nc-Ni, respectively) to the longest edge.
Figure 1. Magnetization M as a function of external magnetic field H for a cold-rolled Ni50Co50 strip and an electrodeposited nanocrystalline (nc) Ni strip, with in-plane magnetic field oriented parallel (ML, black and red curves for Ni50Co50 and nc-Ni, respectively) and transverse (MT, green and blue curves for Ni50Co50 and nc-Ni, respectively) to the longest edge.
Magnetism 04 00012 g001
Figure 2. The dimensional parameters of a rectangular slab. The demagnetizing factors Na, Nb, and Nc correspond to the different orientations of the magnetic field (actually, the magnetization) as indicated.
Figure 2. The dimensional parameters of a rectangular slab. The demagnetizing factors Na, Nb, and Nc correspond to the different orientations of the magnetic field (actually, the magnetization) as indicated.
Magnetism 04 00012 g002
Figure 3. Plots of the demagnetizing factor Na/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of c/a for three selected values of b/a. The symbols are the values tabulated by Osborn [10] and Cronemeyer [12] or given in Table 1. The solid lines are fourth-order polynomial fits to the displayed Na values under the constraint that Na should be zero at c/a = 0.
Figure 3. Plots of the demagnetizing factor Na/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of c/a for three selected values of b/a. The symbols are the values tabulated by Osborn [10] and Cronemeyer [12] or given in Table 1. The solid lines are fourth-order polynomial fits to the displayed Na values under the constraint that Na should be zero at c/a = 0.
Magnetism 04 00012 g003
Figure 4. Plots of the demagnetizing factor Nb/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of c/a for three values of b/a. For an explanation of the symbols and lines, see Figure 3.
Figure 4. Plots of the demagnetizing factor Nb/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of c/a for three values of b/a. For an explanation of the symbols and lines, see Figure 3.
Magnetism 04 00012 g004
Figure 5. Plots of the four coefficients of the fitting equation y = f(x) = k4x4 + k3x3 + k2x2+ k1x for the demagnetizing factor Na/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of b/a. The symbols are the fitted coefficient values as given in Table 2, and the lines are approximate trend lines through the data points. Note that the extremely high values of some of the coefficients for low b/a values were omitted for better visibility of the overall trends.
Figure 5. Plots of the four coefficients of the fitting equation y = f(x) = k4x4 + k3x3 + k2x2+ k1x for the demagnetizing factor Na/4π of the general ellipsoid as a function of b/a. The symbols are the fitted coefficient values as given in Table 2, and the lines are approximate trend lines through the data points. Note that the extremely high values of some of the coefficients for low b/a values were omitted for better visibility of the overall trends.
Magnetism 04 00012 g005
Figure 6. The same as Figure 5 but for the demagnetizing factor Nb/4π.
Figure 6. The same as Figure 5 but for the demagnetizing factor Nb/4π.
Magnetism 04 00012 g006
Table 1. Demagnetizing factors of the general ellipsoid as calculated in the present work from formulae (2.1)–(2.3) from Osborn [10] for selected b/a and c/a values. The N/4π values for c/a = 0.1 were taken from Refs. [10,12] in the case of b/a = 0.1 to 0.9. For b/a = 1.0, we obtained the N/4π values from the formulae for oblate spheroids [10,11,22].
Table 1. Demagnetizing factors of the general ellipsoid as calculated in the present work from formulae (2.1)–(2.3) from Osborn [10] for selected b/a and c/a values. The N/4π values for c/a = 0.1 were taken from Refs. [10,12] in the case of b/a = 0.1 to 0.9. For b/a = 1.0, we obtained the N/4π values from the formulae for oblate spheroids [10,11,22].
b/ac/aNa/4πNb/4πNc/4πb/ac/aNa/4πNb/4πNc/4π
0.10.0050.0013290.0470660.9516050.60.0050.0033450.0071970.989457
0.010.0026120.0898040.907585 0.010.0066420.0142590.979099
0.030.0073380.2274950.765167 0.030.0193570.0412250.939419
0.050.0115280.3279740.660498 0.050.0313640.0662890.902346
0.0750.0161710.4207490.563080 0.0750.0454620.0952230.859315
0.10.02030.48990.4898 0.10.05860.12180.8196
0.20.0050.0020230.0236060.9743720.70.0050.0035240.0060120.990464
0.010.0039980.0460500.949952 0.010.0069980.0119250.981077
0.030.0114550.1257520.862793 0.030.0204240.0346240.944952
0.050.0182790.1922590.789461 0.050.0331380.0559000.910962
0.0750.0260490.2612740.712676 0.0750.0481070.0806770.871216
0.10.03310.31830.6486 0.10.06210.10360.8343
0.30.0050.0024990.0154770.9820230.80.0050.0036710.0051280.991201
0.010.0049500.0304260.964623 0.010.0072940.0101790.982527
0.030.0142970.0854300.900273 0.030.0213110.0296500.949039
0.050.0229750.1337720.843253 0.050.0346110.0480180.917371
0.0750.0329880.1864930.780519 0.0750.0503050.0695520.880143
0.10.04220.23220.7256 0.10.06510.08960.8453
0.40.0050.0028530.0113510.9857960.90.0050.0037960.0044440.991760
0.010.0056570.0224020.971941 0.010.0075430.0088290.983629
0.030.0164100.0638140.919776 0.030.0220580.025780.952162
0.050.0264740.1012250.872300 0.050.0358530.0418490.922298
0.0750.0381820.1431580.818660 0.0750.0521570.0607930.887050
0.10.0490.18050.7705 0.10.06750.07860.8539
0.50.0050.0031270.0088600.98801310.0050.0039020.0039020.992196
0.010.0062050.0175260.976269 0.010.0077550.0077550.98449
0.030.0180490.0503680.931583 0.030.0226930.0226930.954615
0.050.0291930.0805450.890262 0.050.0369090.0369090.926181
0.0750.0422250.1149650.842810 0.0750.0537380.0537380.892524
0.10.05440.14620.7994 0.10.0695980.0695980.860804
Table 2. Fit functions y = f(x) = k4x4 + k3x3 + k2x2+ k1x obtained by fitting a fourth-order polynomial to the N/4π vs. c/a data from Refs. [10,12] as well as from Table 1 and graphs shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4 for various fixed values of b/a. The Nc/4π values can then be obtained from Equation (2).
Table 2. Fit functions y = f(x) = k4x4 + k3x3 + k2x2+ k1x obtained by fitting a fourth-order polynomial to the N/4π vs. c/a data from Refs. [10,12] as well as from Table 1 and graphs shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4 for various fixed values of b/a. The Nc/4π values can then be obtained from Equation (2).
Demagnetizing Factorb/aFitted Polynomials for Na/4π and Nb/4π vs. c/a Data
Na/4π0.1y = −8.213325x4 + 3.683730x3 − 0.959648x2 + 0.270340x
0.2y = −2.056457x4 + 1.893922x3 − 0.943486x2 + 0.408386x
0.3y = −1.036537x4 + 1.383364x3 − 0.937688x2 + 0.502749x
0.4y = −0.649740x4 + 1.058068x3 − 0.901723x2 + 0.570613x
0.5y = −0.634477x4 + 1.093231x3 − 0.950133x2 + 0.628057x
0.6y = −0.416283x4 + 0.892748x3 − 0.918148x2 + 0.669353x
0.7y = −0.323111x4 + 0.789552x3 − 0.901536x2 + 0.703562x
0.8y = −0.277554x4 + 0.737396x3 − 0.896990x2 + 0.732554x
0.9y = −0.226527x4 + 0.664125x3 − 0.875293x2 + 0.754415x
1.0y = −0.190013x4 + 0.607244x3 − 0.857422x2 + 0.773218x
Nb/4π0.1y = −2725.800x4 + 797.2283x3 − 104.9405x2 + 10.14657x
0.2y = −122.1111x4 + 78.27606x3 − 23.08401x2 + 4.822780x
0.3y = −19.49980x4 + 20.34586x3 − 9.691984x2 + 3.109993x
0.4y = −6.783389x4 + 8.992644x3 − 5.484144x2 + 2.269712x
0.5y = −2.650351x4 + 4.504643x3 − 3.476309x2 + 1.769546x
0.6y = −1.337034x4 + 2.687582x3 − 2.427738x2 + 1.436237x
0.7y = −0.782321x4 + 1.770638x3 − 1.798673x2 + 1.199285x
0.8y = −0.475207x4 + 1.211208x3 − 1.377362x2 + 1.022217x
0.9y = −0.278778x4 + 0.814805x3 − 1.057882x2 + 0.880707x
1.0y = −0.190013x4 + 0.607244x3 − 0.857422x2 + 0.773218x
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kiss, L.F.; Bakonyi, I. An Update to The Demagnetizing Factor Dataset Calculated for The General Ellipsoid by Osborn. Magnetism 2024, 4, 173-182. https://doi.org/10.3390/magnetism4030012

AMA Style

Kiss LF, Bakonyi I. An Update to The Demagnetizing Factor Dataset Calculated for The General Ellipsoid by Osborn. Magnetism. 2024; 4(3):173-182. https://doi.org/10.3390/magnetism4030012

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kiss, László F., and Imre Bakonyi. 2024. "An Update to The Demagnetizing Factor Dataset Calculated for The General Ellipsoid by Osborn" Magnetism 4, no. 3: 173-182. https://doi.org/10.3390/magnetism4030012

APA Style

Kiss, L. F., & Bakonyi, I. (2024). An Update to The Demagnetizing Factor Dataset Calculated for The General Ellipsoid by Osborn. Magnetism, 4(3), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.3390/magnetism4030012

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop