Lne r g y s t or e d i n pe r ma ne nt ma g ne t s
loward C Loat t
1
and Pet er A \at t erson
2
Abstract 1here has been some confusion over the energy stored in a permanent
magnet, with many texts and some finite element packages giving incorrect values. We
demonstrate the correct formulation, both under normal operation and partial
demagnetization and discuss the physical meaning of stored energy in a permanent
magnet.
Index terms Stored energy, permanent magnets, demagnetization, work done.
NOMLNCLA1URL
0
Permeability o ree space
,410

l,m,
r
Relatie dierential permeability o magnet ,assumed constant,
Magnetic lux density ,1,
min Minimum experienced by the magnet ,1,
r Remanent o the magnet ,1,
a Depth into page ,m,
lorce ,N,
Magnetic ield strength ,A,m,
min Minimum experienced by the magnet ,A,m,
tv Magnet length ,m,
tg 1hickness o air gap ,m,
tv 1hickness o magnet ,m,
r Volume ,m
3
,
! \ork done ,stored energy, ,J,
Air gap length ,m,
1. IN1RODUC1I ON
Understanding the energy stored in magnetic circuits is undamental to understanding their operation. It is
thereore surprising that although permanent magnets are a common eature o many magnetic circuits there is
still some conusion about the energy stored in the magnet. 1he Appendix lists some incorrect deinitions which
hae appeared in the literature. 1he Authors are also aware o two inite element packages that incorrectly
calculate the stored energy, see Appendix.
By consideration o the electrical energy input into an ideal solenoid the standard deinition or the magnetic
energy o a material in which and are parallel can be ound and it is the ollowing olume integral 14:
W H B B v
B
=
( ) d d
1 1
0
,1,
where 1 is a dummy integration ariable.
1
lC Loatt is with CSIRO 1elecommunications and Industrial Physics, PO Box 218, Lindield, NS\, Australia 200.
2
PA \atterson is with 1he Uniersity o 1echnology Sydney, laculty o Lngineering, PO Box 123, Broadway, NS\, Australia 200.
2
\hen orce is calculated rom the deriatie o stored energy with respect to a irtual displacement, the
choice o the lower limit o integration or the energy density is mathematically arbitrary. loweer, or a rigid`
permanent magnet ,such as a modern rare earth magnet,, acting along its linear demagnetization ,recoil,
characteristic with a slope r, we beliee that it is best to choose the lower limit as the remanence r, as depicted
in lig. 1, i.e.
W H B B v
B
B
r
=
( ) d d
1 1
,2,
\ith this deinition the energy is zero or a magnet with a keeper, i.e. with ~ 0, and positie and
symmetric in on either side o ~ 0. ,NB when the integration is downward along the demagnetization line,
both and d are negatie., It will be demonstrated below that this deinition o stored energy is particularly
conenient under the condition o partial demagnetization.
1here are also good physical reasons or this choice o zero energy:
1, i the keeper is remoed then the energy will increase as work is done on the system,
2, the choice is consistent with the normal deinition or energy in an unmagnetized ,r ~ 0,
material ,e.g. air, see equation ,1,,,
3, it seems natural to always consider stored energy as positie ,e.g. a spring stores positie energy
i it is either compressed or stretched,, and
4, we show in part 3 that it is permissible to consider only energy that can be easily recoered, i.e
to exclude the energy associated with the atoms, crystal structure, and energy lost as heat during
magnetization.
= 0r
+
r
H
Stored energy density
lig. 1. Recommended deinition o stored energy density in a permanent magnet.
1he next section conirms that this deinition ,2, gies the correct orce or a simple idealised permanent
magnet circuit with no electrical energy input ,e.g. see 4,, namely
=
d
d
,3,
and section 3 proides a ormula or energy which also holds or a partially demagnetized magnet.
2. CONlI RMA1I ON Ol 1lL LNLRG\lORCL RLLA1I ONSlI P
1his section examines the simple idealised magnetic circuit depicted in lig. 2, containing a magnet with a
linear demagnetization cure, lig. 3, and conirms that i ,2, is used or the energy in the magnet, then the orce
3
on the keeper satisies ,3,. lringing and leakage are neglected and the iron is assumed ideal, i.e. ininite
permeability and nonsaturating. Using subscript v or magnet and g or air gap then the magnet is assumed to
satisy
v r v r
= +
0
,4,
Ampere`s law and lux conseration imply
t
g
v v
0
2 0 + = ,5,
t t
g g v v
= ,6,
,NB Lquation ,6, is only true in practice or a zero length air gap., Soling the linear system ,4,,6, gies
t t
t t t
g
r v v
v r g v
=
+ 2
t t
t t t
v
r v g
v r g v
=
+ 2
t
t t t
v
r v
v r g v
=
+
2
2
0
, ,
,,
1he ideal iron magnetic energy is zero and thereore the total magnetic energy is the sum o contributions
rom the gaps, as gien by ,1,, and the magnet, as gien by ,2,
! t a
g g
g
= 2
1
2
2
0
, ,
,8,
! t t a
v v v r v
= , ,
1
2
0
2
,9,
Substitution o ,,, leads directly to conirmation that the orce calculated by ,3, or the energies gien by
,8,,9, equals the product o the total gap area multiplied by the generally accepted magnetic orce per unit area
,e.g. see 4,, i.e.
F
x
W W t d
B
g m g
g
= + =
d
d
( ) ( ) 2
2
2
0
,10,
tg
tv
magnet
tv
Depth into
page a
lig. 2. System with a permanent magnet and ideal iron.
4
3. DLMAGNL1I ZA1I ON AND RLAL MAGNL1S
In real magnets the demagnetization ,recoil, cure is not a straight line, howeer or modern rare earth
magnets it is a ery close approximation and hence a constant r is adopted to simpliy the analysis. \hen too
large a demagnetizing ield or too high a temperature is applied to a magnet it will at least partially demagnetize.
1he subsequent operation o the magnet is approximately along a recoil line with the same r as the original line,
i.e along
B H H B
r
= +
0
( )
min min
,11,
where min is the minimum experienced by the magnet and min is the corresponding ,see lig. 3,.
B H B
r r
= +
0
min
r
Stored
energy
min
B H H B
r
= +
0
( )
min min
lig. 3. Demagnetization characteristics o an ideal magnet.
1hereore or any point on the new recoil line, the energy stored per unit olume in the magnet is
W
v
H B H B H
o r r
= =
1
2
1
2
0
2
(( ) )
min min
,12,
Lxpressing the energy in terms o aoids the need to account or the ariation o r and is a particularly
elegant expression thanks to the limits chosen or ,2,, namely r to . 1he energy between the dotted and solid
lines in lig. 3 is the energy responsible or the demagnetization and is lost primarily as heat ,commonly reerred
to as hysteresis loss,.
lor any linear material and including, or example, when a component o is applied in the direction
perpendicular to the magnetization direction in a magnet the energy is o the orm ,12, ,inserting the appropriate
approximately constant r,.
4. CONCLUSI ONS
\e hae demonstrated that the stored magnetic energy per unit olume in an ideal magnet with a linear
recoil line and magnetic ield along the magnetization direction is best stated as
W
v
H
r
=
1
2
0
2
5
In general it is better to calculate this energy rom instead o , because calculations based on are alid
under partial demagnetization conditions. 1he component o perpendicular to the magnetization direction in
the magnet ,or in any linear material, contributes an energy o identical orm, but a dierent r may apply.
ACKNO\LLDGMLN1S
1he authors would like to thank their colleagues at 1he Uniersity o 1echnology and at CSIRO
1elecommunications and Industrial Physics or proo reading the text and proiding many stimulating
discussions on this topic. PA \atterson would like to thank the NS\ Goernment Department o Lnergy or
unding or this work.
RLlLRLNCLS
1 BI Bleany and B Bleany, tectricit, ava Magveti.v, Clarendon Press, 195, p. 161.
2 G\ Carter, 1be tectrovagvetic ieta iv it. vgiveerivg ..ect., Longmans, 2
nd
Ld., 196, p. 195.
3 AL litzgerald, C Kingsley Jr, and SD Umans, tectric Macbiver,, ISBN 000083, McGrawlill, 5
th
Ld.,
1992, p. 105.
4 GR Slemon and A Straughen, tectric Macbive., ISBN 02010329, Addison\esley, 1980, Section 3.1.2.
5 RP Deodhar, DA Staton, 1M Jahns, and 1JL Miller, Prediction o cogging torque using the luxMMl
diagram technique`, 1rav.. ov va. .t., Vol. 32, No. 3, May,June 1996, pp. 56956.
6 P Campbell, Pervavevt vagvet vateriat. ava tbeir aticatiov, ISBN 0521249961, Cambridge Uniersity Press,
1994, p. 18 and pp. 9899.
 RJ Parker, .aravce. iv ervavevt vagveti.v, ISBN 041822930, John \iley & Sons, 1990, Section 2.6.
8 M McCaig and AG Clegg, Pervavevt vagvet., ISBN 0231615X, Pentech Press, 2
nd
Ld., 198, p. 228.
APPLNDIX  INCORRLC1 DLlI NI 1I ONS Ol LNLRG\
1he ollowing lists some ambiguous or incorrect deinitions o energy that hae appeared in the literature
,including another ILLL journal,.
Deodhar: et at. 5 probably correctly calculated the coenergy ,d), which can be used equally as well as
the energy to calculate orces. loweer their lig. 3 incorrectly suggests that the energy ,or coenergy, it is not
clear which, is the area o a triangle between the operating point, the remanence point, and the origin ,see our
lig. 4,. Also see the discussions o Campbell 6 and Parker  below.
6
H
Incorrect deinition
o stored energy
density
lig. 4. Incorrect deinition o stored energy gien in the literature.
Campbell 6 states on p. 18 o his book that 1o delier its stored energy, the magnet must moe into the
second quadrant .`. 1hereore the magnet supposedly has decreasing energy as its goes negatie, or the
energy decreases as work is done on the system! lurther, in his lig. 4.13 d is labelled magnet kinetic
energy` and the area is labelled total potential energy`. In a similar manner to Deodhar: et at. 5 and Parker
, the change in the energy as the magnet moes down its load line is shown in Campbell`s lig. 4.14 to be as in
our lig. 4. 1his is contrary to Campbell`s lig. 4.13.
Parker  does start o using the correct ormula or energy, d, in his equation ,2.13,. loweer in a
discussion on conerting mechanical energy into stored magnetic energy the same area as shown in our lig. 4 is
used ,his equation 2.2,. 1his is similar to Deodhar: et at. 5 and Campbell 6.
McCaig and Clegg 8 claim that our equation ,3,, i.e. conseration o energy, is not alid. 1hey say, It
seems certain, howeer, that the work done is insuicient to produce the energies both inside and outside the
magnet.`. 1his assertion seems to be based on the act that orce per unit area ~
2
,,20, is not uniersally
applicable. 1heir solution is to propose that the energy stored in the magnet is negatie, presumable to account
or their perceied dierence in the work done and total stored energy.
A noticeable characteristic o many o these texts ,5, is that they use the area shown in our lig. 4 as the
stored energy in a magnet. I this deinition is used as either energy or coenergy it gies the wrong orce when
added to the energy or coenergy in the rest o the circuit and dierentiated.
1he Authors are aware o two inite element packages that incorrectly calculate the stored energy in a
permanent magnet: MO1ORCAD and ANS\S. MO1ORCAD shits the non linear 2
nd
quadrant magnet
characteristics to the irst quadrant by modelling a current loop that accounts or the coerciity and then gies
the stored energy as
1
2
BH , where and are the 1
st
quadrant quantities. ANS\S 5.2 integrates rom 0 to
and then uses the modulus o the result ,presumably to make it positie,. lollowing correspondence with the
Authors ersions 5.3 and 5.4 o ANS\S correctly calculate the energy when the characteristic is linear in the
2
nd
quadrant. loweer, the hysteresis loss is included when the characteristic is nonlinear, see our lig. 3 or the
correct deinition under partial demagnetization. Since mistakes are common in the literature it would be
surprising i more inite element packages were not in error, MO1ORCAD and ANS\S are the only packages
the Authors are amiliar with.