Accuracy of the analytical demagnetization tensor for various geometries
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, ISSN: 0304-8853, Vol: 587, Page: 171245
2023
- 1Citations
- 1Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
We investigate the accuracy of the analytical expressions for the magnetostatic demagnetization tensor for three different geometries by comparing these to the dipole field at far-away distances. We consider a prism, tetrahedron and cylindrical tile geometry. We show that for the prism and tetrahedron tiles the median relative error compared to the dipole field reaches below 10−7 at 200 tile radii away from the generating tile, while the cylindrical tile has a median relative error of about 10−5 at this distance. Even at a distance of 104 tile radii the relative error is below 10−2 for all tiles, also when single precision is used to calculate the magnetic field. This shows that the demagnetization tensor is an accurate way of calculating the stray magnetic field also for far-away distances.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304885323008958; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2023.171245; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85172257693&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304885323008958; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2023.171245
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know