Determining magnetic field strength as a function of current in Helmholtz coils

Corrigendum

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54355/tbusphys/2.3.2024.0016

Keywords:

Helmholtz coils, magnetic field strength, current variation, digital teslameter, calibration factor

Abstract

Corrigendum Notice: A corrigendum has been issued for this article and is included at the end of this document. Referred to by: “N. Erzhanova, “Determining magnetic field strength as a function of current in Helmholtz coils”, tbusphys, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 0016, Jul. 2024. doi: 10.54355/tbusphys/2.3.2024.0016”

This study investigates the correlation between the magnetic field strength generated by two Helmholtz coils and the current passing through them. Utilizing a 100 Ohm, 1.8 A rheostat, the Helmholtz coils are connected to a variable power source (0-20V, 0-5A), ensuring stable positioning. The magnetic field at the center of the coils is precisely measured using a digital Teslameter with a Hall probe, as the current is incrementally adjusted. A digital multimeter, equipped with multiple operational modes, facilitates data collection and ensures accuracy. The empirical validation of theoretical predictions is achieved by plotting magnetic field strength against current. Adherence to stringent safety protocols, such as temperature monitoring and secure electrical connections, is maintained throughout the experiment. Helmholtz coils are mounted on a robust core assembly using supports, clamps, and rods to ensure alignment and stability. The experimental setup includes the calculation of the calibration factor and the horizontal flux density as a function of coil current. Additionally, the maximum needle deflection at 4 A allows for the measurement of the angle between the coil axis and the "north/south" direction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Nazerke Erzhanova, Astana International University, School of Natural Sciences, 8 Kabanbay ave., Astana, Kazakhstan

Master Student

References

F. Donadini, M. Korte, and C. Constable, “Millennial variations of the geomagnetic field: From data recovery to field reconstruction,” Space Sci. Rev., vol. 155, no. 1–4, pp. 219–246, Aug. 2010, doi: 10.1007/S11214-010-9662-Y/METRICS.

M. Dumberry and C. C. Finlay, “Eastward and westward drift of the Earth’s magnetic field for the last three millennia,” Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., vol. 254, no. 1–2, pp. 146–157, Feb. 2007, doi: 10.1016/J.EPSL.2006.11.026.

M. Korte, C. Constable, F. Donadini, and R. Holme, “Reconstructing the Holocene geomagnetic field,” Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., vol. 312, no. 3–4, pp. 497–505, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1016/J.EPSL.2011.10.031.

E. M. King and B. A. Buffett, “Flow speeds and length scales in geodynamo models: The role of viscosity,” Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., vol. 371–372, pp. 156–162, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1016/J.EPSL.2013.04.001.

M. Kono and P. H. Roberts, “Definition of the Rayleigh number for geodynamo simulation,” Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., vol. 128, no. 1–4, pp. 13–24, Dec. 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(01)00274-6.

M. Schrinner, D. Schmitt, R. Cameron, and P. Hoyng, “Saturation and time dependence of geodynamo models,” Geophys. J. Int., vol. 182, no. 2, pp. 675–681, Aug. 2010, doi: 10.1111/J.1365-246X.2010.04650.X/2/M_182-2-675-EQ016.JPEG.

M. D. Menu, L. Petitdemange, and S. Galtier, “Magnetic effects on fields morphologies and reversals in geodynamo simulations,” Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., vol. 307, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2020.106542.

N. Olsen et al., “The Swarm satellite constellation application and research facility (SCARF) and Swarm data products,” Earth, Planets Sp., vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 1189–1200, Nov. 2013, doi: 10.5047/EPS.2013.07.001/TABLES/4.

C. C. Finlay, N. Olsen, and L. Tøffner-Clausen, “DTU candidate field models for IGRF-12 and the CHAOS-5 geomagnetic field model International Geomagnetic Reference Field - The Twelfth generation,” Earth, Planets Sp., vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1186/S40623-015-0274-3/FIGURES/11.

J. Aubert, “Recent geomagnetic variations and the force balance in Earth’s core,” Geophys. J. Int., vol. 221, no. 1, pp. 378–393, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1093/GJI/GGAA007.

C. J. Davies, R. K. Bono, D. G. Meduri, J. Aubert, S. Greenwood, and A. J. Biggin, “Dynamo constraints on the long-term evolution of Earth’s magnetic field strength,” Geophys. J. Int., vol. 228, no. 1, pp. 316–336, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1093/GJI/GGAB342.

G. Hulot et al., “Swarm’s absolute magnetometer experimental vector mode, an innovative capability for space magnetometry,” Geophys. Res. Lett., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 1352–1359, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1002/2014GL062700.

R. Tozzi, M. Pezzopane, P. De Michelis, and M. Piersanti, “Applying a curl-B technique to Swarm vector data to estimate nighttime F region current intensities,” Geophys. Res. Lett., vol. 42, no. 15, pp. 6162–6169, Aug. 2015, doi: 10.1002/2015GL064841.

S. Maus, “Mysterious misalignments between geomagnetic and stellar reference frames seen in CHAMP and Swarm satellite measurements,” Geophys. J. Int., vol. 203, no. 3, pp. 1873–1876, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1093/GJI/GGV409.

Q. Li et al., “Performance Analysis of GPS/BDS Broadcast Ionospheric Models in Standard Point Positioning during 2021 Strong Geomagnetic Storms,” Remote Sens. 2022, Vol. 14, Page 4424, vol. 14, no. 17, p. 4424, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3390/RS14174424.

X. Li, H. Cai, D. Li, C. Geng, L. Chen, and J. Xu, “Analysis of the influence of geomagnetic storms on the ionospheric model of beidou/GPS system,” Lect. Notes Electr. Eng., vol. 388, pp. 503–510, 2016, doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-0934-1_43/FIGURES/4.

Downloads

Published

2024-07-29

How to Cite

Erzhanova, N. (2024). Determining magnetic field strength as a function of current in Helmholtz coils: Corrigendum. Technobius Physics, 2(3), 0016. https://doi.org/10.54355/tbusphys/2.3.2024.0016