Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ravaud cuboid field #14

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
72 changes: 72 additions & 0 deletions matlab/private/cuboid_field.m
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
%Matthew Forbes - [email protected]

%Eqn from Ravaud 2009 - MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCED BY A PARALLELEPI-
% PEDIC MAGNET OF VARIOUS AND UNIFORM POLAR-
% ZATION

function H = cuboid_field(sigma,phi,theta,x_m,y_m,z_m,X,Y,Z)

%theta - CCW angle from the +x-axis to the polarisation vector
% (XY-plane // about Z)
%phi - CW angle from the +z-axis to the polarisation vector
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it possible to rewrite the equations around having a magnetization vector such as Mx,My,Mz so that theta & phi don’t need to be figured out?

%x1,y1,z1 - reference corner of magnet
%x2,y2,z2 - opposite corner of magnet, defining direction of coordinate
% system and dimension of magnet
% x_m = [x1,x2] ...
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For consistency with other approaches, I think the inputs into this function should be x_c,y_c,z_c for the magnet centre with d_x,d_y,d_z for the cuboid widths. Or similar. Could even be two 3x1 vectors instead.

%sigma - magnetic field strength, tesla
%X,Y,Z - field points

%unit conversion
M0 = sigma*8*10^5; % A/m

%magnetic permeability of free space
u0 = 4*pi*10^-7 ; %H/m

%summation of function over i,j,k 1:2
[i,j,k]=meshgrid(1:2,1:2,1:2);
d=size(X);

%reshape index array for 8 summations and size of field array
i=repmat(reshape(i,[1,1,8]),d);
j=repmat(reshape(j,[1,1,8]),d);
k=repmat(reshape(k,[1,1,8]),d);

%reshape field array to match index array
x=ones(d(1),d(2),8).*X;
y=ones(d(1),d(2),8).*Y;
z=ones(d(1),d(2),8).*Z;

%define equation constant D
D=((-1).^(i+j+k));

%define equation constant zeta
zeta = sqrt((x-x_m(i)+eps).^2+(y-y_m(j)+eps).^2+(z-z_m(k)+eps).^2);
zeta(isnan(zeta))=0;

%calculate magnetic field strength
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does Ravaud provide the singular cases so we can get rid of the eps terms? It’s a bit ugly to hack around them like this and doesn’t entirely eliminate the problem (not out of the realm of possibility that a user would provide a displacement of eps, say.)

Hx = ((M0*sin(phi)*cos(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*(atan(((y-y_m(j)+eps)...
.*(z-z_m(k)+eps))./((x-x_m(i)+eps).*zeta))),3)...
+((M0*sin(phi)*sin(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((z-z_m(k)+eps)...
+zeta)),3)...
+((M0*cos(phi))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((y-y_m(j)+eps)+zeta)),3);

Hy = ((M0*sin(phi)*cos(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((z-z_m(k)+eps)...
+zeta)),3)...
+((M0*sin(phi)*sin(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*(atan(((x-x_m(i)+eps)...
.*(z-z_m(k)+eps))./((y-y_m(j)+eps).*zeta))),3)...
+((M0*cos(phi))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((x-x_m(i)+eps)+zeta)),3);

Hz = ((M0*sin(phi)*cos(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((y-y_m(j)+eps)...
+zeta)),3)...
+((M0*sin(phi)*sin(theta))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*-real(log((x-x_m(i)+eps)...
+zeta)),3)...
+((M0*cos(phi))/(4*pi))*sum(D.*(atan(((x-x_m(i)+eps)...
.*(y-y_m(j)+eps))./((z-z_m(k)+eps).*zeta))),3);

H = cat(3,Hx,Hy,Hz);

%magnetic flux density
B = u0.*H;
Copy link
Member Author

@wspr wspr Dec 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

M0 could be removed from the Hx,Hy,Hz equations above and moved down to here.


end