IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 36, NO.
1, JANUARY 2000
Letters__________________________________________________________________________________________
Comments on Energy Stored in Permanent Magnets
Peter Campbell, Member, IEEE
Abstract—A recent paper on the energy stored in permanent
magnets was based upon some erroneous assumptions. These com-
ments are presented in an effort to explain a few truths about the
energy exchanges in a magnetic circuit containing a permanent
magnet.
Index Terms—Demagnetization, permanent magnets, stored en-
ergy, work done.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N THEIR recent paper, Lovatt and Watterson [1] introduced
their discussion on permanent magnets with the statement
that there is still some confusion about the energy stored in the
magnet. The energy stored in a permanent magnet of volume
is correctly identified as
(1)
However, the lower limit of this integration is not “mathemat-
ically arbitrary” as that paper suggests, and it cannot then be
assumed that the magnet’s energy is zero at the remanence ,
i.e., for the magnet in a keeper with . To understand this,
simply consider that a magnet in a keeper which is operating
at its has effectively been fully magnetized, and the most
common method of doing this would have been to apply a large
current pulse to a coil (or coils) mounted on the keeper. The
current pulse has therefore driven the magnet up its virgin mag-
netization curve, and then allowed it to settle on its demagne-
tization curve at the remanence . There has therefore been a
considerable input of energy to initially magnetize the perma-
nent magnet material—work done by the applied magnetizing
field.
The conclusion of Lovatt and Watterson’s paper is the deriva-
tion of the energy stored in a magnet operating on its recoil line
of relative permeability as
(2)
This is incorrect because of the arbitrarily wrong initial assump-
tion of zero magnet energy at . The authors’ [1, Fig. 4] illus-
trates what they believe to be an incorrect definition of stored
magnet energy originating from in Deodhar et al. [2, Fig. 3],
Manuscript received March 31, 1999; revised October 12, 1999.
The author is with Applied Technology, Magnequench International, Inc., Re-
search Triangle Park, NC 27709-4827 USA (e-mail: peter@magnetweb.com).
Publisher Item Identifier S 0018-9464(00)00466-0.
0018–9464/00$10.00 © 2000 IEEE
401
but the latter reference correctly identifies this area swept by
the load line as the change in total energy.
II. ENERGY STORED IN A PERMANENT MAGNET
For a better understanding of permanent magnet energy, it is
probably best not to use (1) as the starting point. Rather, the fun-
damental macroscopic property of a magnet is its magnetization
, and the energy stored by a magnetic field in volume of a
magnet is well known [3] to be
(3)
To account for the change in energy caused by a variation in ,
either during a magnet’s initial magnetization or its subsequent
delivery of energy into an air gap, (3) becomes
(4)
The first term involves change in applied field only, and is
the work done by the applied field. The second term involves
change in material magnetization only, and is the energy
due to reversals of magnetic moments.
It is now possible to introduce the resulting flux density via
the magnet’s demagnetization characteristic
(5)
It has been shown [4] that (5) can be used to reduce (4) to a
relationship involving just and , expressing the change in
magnet energy per unit volume between two states and as
the change in the product
(6)
It is important to note in the derivation [4] of (6) from (4) that
the two original terms maintain their identities throughout, so
the second term is still the change in energy due to the mate-
rial’s magnetization, i.e., the energy stored per unit volume in
the magnet material as was defined by (1). Because the limits of
integration in (6) represent two dissimilar states for the magnet,
the sum of applied field and magnet energies is not zero, but has
a potential energy value equal to the product. The change in
energy stored per unit volume in a magnet may be represented
as an integration along the demagnetization characteristic, for
example from the remanence state to a general second quad-
rant state as shown in Fig. 1. As the magnet’s operating point
moves further into the second quadrant, the area in-
creases as the net alignment of the magnetic moments is further
402
Fig. 1. Change in energy stored per unit volume in a magnet, from the
remanence state b to a general second quadrant state c.
disrupted, and there is an increasing decline ( ) in the
energy due to the material’s magnetization.
III. EXAMPLE: A VARIABLE RELUCTANCE ACTUATOR
An illustration of the energy stored in a permanent magnet
is provided by this simple example of a variable reluctance
actuator. In a popular configuration, a disk-shaped permanent
magnet rotor is axially magnetized with a multipole array. A
linearized representation of two of these poles is shown in
Fig. 2, between salient poles of the two stator halves (which
are magnetically connected out of this diagram’s plane).
The soft iron stator poles carry coils, but when these are not
excited, the rotor settles into its neutral position shown in
Fig. 2. The demagnetization characteristic for both permanent
magnets is illustrated in Fig. 3, together with the load line
representing their condition with the coils unexcited and the
rotor neutral—an equal volume of each magnet is under the
influence of the stator poles.
With the coils excited with the polarity shown, we know intu-
itively that the rotor will move to the left in this diagram, due to
the attraction of opposite poles and the repulsion of like poles.
In terms of the energy stored in each permanent magnet, the
coil excitation reinforces the field in the “remagnetized pole,”
while it weakens the field in the “demagnetized pole.” The load
line for the former moves to the right in the - diagram,
while line for the latter moves to the left, both lateral displace-
ments being equal since both magnets experience the same ap-
plied field. The changes in energy in each magnet are
shown as shaded areas in Fig. 3, the energy lost per unit volume
of the “demagnetized pole” clearly being greater than the energy
gained per unit volume of the “remagnetized pole.” To minimize
the total change in magnet energy, the volume of the “remag-
netized pole” must increase while of the “demagnetized pole”
must decrease, and this determines the distance by which the
rotor assembly must move to the left. The proper application of
stored magnet energy predicts a movement of the rotor that we
know to occur.
IV. ENERGY DELIVERED TO AN AIR GAP
Lovatt and Watterson’s concluding equation (2) is actually
more akin to the energy stored in an air gap than a magnet. It is
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 36, NO. 1, JANUARY 2000
Fig. 2. Linear representation of two adjacent magnets in a variable reluctance
actuator, with rotor in its neutral position.
Fig. 3. Operating condition for both magnets of Fig. 2, without (A ) and with
(B ; C ) field applied by stator coil.
well known that (1) can be used to yield the energy stored in an
air gap of volume as
(7)
Assuming that effectively represents the entire load on the
magnet, then magnetic circuit equations can be used to trans-
form this into the magnet’s parameters
(8)
While a permanent magnet’s major demagnetization charac-
teristic is represented by (5), once the magnet operates on a re-
coil line of relative permeability , this changes to
(9)
In this case, is the remanence of the recoil line, not neces-
sarily that for the fully magnetized material. Combining (8) and
(9) yields
(10)
Noting that a magnet needs to operate in the second (or third)
quadrant to deliver its energy to an air gap, i.e., that is nega-
tive in (10), this expression reveals that the magnet energy de-
livered to the gap passes through a maximum at some point in
the second quadrant, as well described by Parker [5].
Comparison of (2) and (10) reveals that the source of Lovatt
and Watterson’s “confusion” is that, while the energy stored in
a magnet at is not zero, the energy delivered to a gap
will in fact be zero.
CAMPBELL: COMMENTS ON ENERGY STORED IN PERMANENT MAGNETS
V. CONCLUSION
In general, one needs to consider both magnet and air gap en-
ergies to determine the performance of an electromechanical de-
vice, as Deodhar et al. [2] do in their treatment of cogging torque
in permanent magnet motors. The change in energy stored per
unit volume in a magnet has been illustrated in Fig. 1 as the
area from the remanence state to a general second
quadrant state . Between the same states, the energy released
into the air gap is also a function of the magnet’s parameters
according to (8). The area on the - diagram associated with
this additional energy may be added to to yield the total
area swept by the load line, demonstrating that this is indeed the
total change in energy as described by Deodhar et al. [2], and
has not been incorrectly defined as stored energy density as pro-
posed in Lovatt and Watterson’s [1, Fig. 4].
Having explained the total energy change which would be
needed for the subsequent calculation of force or torque in an
electromechanical device, it is worth adding a word of caution.
All of the previous discussion is limited to the condition that
, and are aligned throughout the magnet volume . If
the fundamental relationship for energy stored is expressed at
any specific location within , then an equation like (3) should
contain the additional factor cos , where is the angle between
and [3]. By considering only the entire volume , we
are assuming that everywhere. Furthermore, by inte-
grating a magnet’s energy using (5), it should be understood
that this demagnetization characteristic, and all of its associ-
403
ated recoil lines, are obtained by measuring , and hence
in a unique direction throughout , usually the preferred mag-
netic direction. When a magnet is used in a real application, this
is rarely true throughout its entire volume, and an anisotropic
magnet cannot accurately be represented solely by its major axis
demagnetization curve.
REFERENCES
[1] H. C. Lovatt and P. A. Watterson, “Energy stored in permanent magnets,”
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 35, pp. 505–507, Jan. 1999.
[2] R. P. Deodhar, D. A. Staton, T. M. Jahns, and T. J. E. Miller, “Prediction
of cogging torque using the flux-MMF diagram technique,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Applicat., vol. 32, pp. 569–576, May/June 1996.
[3] R. M. Bozorth, Ferromagnetism. New York: Van Nostrand, 1951, pp.
481–481.
[4] P. Campbell, Permanent Magnet Materials and Their Applica-
tion. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994, pp. 16–17.
[5] R. J. Parker, Advances in Permanent Magnetism. New York: Wiley,
1990, pp. 141–143.
Peter Campbell (M’78) received the B.Sc degree in 1970 and the Ph.D. degree
in 1975 in electrical engineering from the University of Warwick, U.K. He also
received the M.A. degree in 1974 from the University of Cambridge, U.K.
He is Director of Applied Technology with Magnequench International, Inc.,
at its Technology Center in Research Triangle Park, NC. He has also been Presi-
dent of Princeton Electro-Technology, Inc., NJ, since 1985. Prior to that, he was
President of PA Technology, Princeton, NJ, and has been an Assistant Professor
of Electrical Engineering at the University of Southern California, and an Assis-
tant Lecturer at the University of Cambridge, U.K., where he was also a Fellow
of Downing College.