Ferrous Material Fill: Magnetization Channels, Layer-by-Layer and Average Permeability, Element-to-Element Field

  • Anna A. SandulyakEmail author
  • Darya A. Sandulyak
  • Vera A. Ershova
  • Alexander V. Sandulyak
Part of the Advanced Structured Materials book series (STRUCTMAT, volume 81)


For the magnetic samples of heterogeneous (including bulk) ferrousmaterials, a qualitative, and according to the data on the demagnetization factor N of finely dispersed samples quantitative assessment of the volume fraction is provided for the characteristic intervals γ of the ferrous component. There are three intervals: the first one is γ ≤ 0.2, the second one is 0.2 < γ ≤ 0.4–0.45, and the third one is γ > 0.4–0.45 (up to \( \gamma \cong 0.6 \) for a material filled with “densely packed” granules or grains). It should be noted that samples of heterogeneous ferrous materials within the third interval γ, according to the stabilization of N and its proximity to the N-value for a uniform sample (which indicates a “magnetic splicing” of the ferroelements in the heterogenous material), possess the features of a uniform magnetic sample and, therefore, they fully correspond to the notion of a quasi-uniform object. Special attention is paid to filling of granules or grains (with their inherently stable value of γ) as a completely independent class of heterogeneous ferrous materials.

In order to solve the actual problems related to the determination of magnetic properties for the filling of ferroelements (granules, grains), it is preferable to use the model of selective, channeled magnetization. At the same time, the concept of this model implies obtaining necessary theoretical and experimental solutions both for the channel as a whole and for its parts (conditional cores and tube layers of different radius). In addition, such key parameters of the model as magnetic permeability of channel tube layers \( \tilde{\mu } \) and their cores < \( \tilde{\mu } \) > (averaged data of \( \tilde{\mu } \)) depending on their radius and intensity of magnetization field will be analyzed. It is shown the compliance of experimental data with theoretical data. The physical meaning of the parameter \( \tilde{\mu } \) reveals: it corresponds to the relative field strength h in the pores between granules.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The research is conducted with financial support from RFFI within the frameworks of research project No 16-38-60034 mol_a_dk and from Russian Federation Ministry of Education and Science No 9.9626.2017.


  1. Anhalt M, Weidenfeller B (2007) Magnetic properties of polymer bonded soft magnetic particles for various filler fractions. Journal of Applied Physics 101(2):023,907Google Scholar
  2. Anhalt M, Weidenfeller B, Mattei JL (2008) Inner demagnetization factor in polymer-bonded soft magnetic composites. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 320(20):e844–e848Google Scholar
  3. Bennacer L, Ahfir ND, Bouanani A, Alem A, Wang H (2013) Suspended particles transport and deposition in saturated granular porous medium: Particle size effects. Transport in Porous Media 100(3):377–392Google Scholar
  4. Bottauscio O, Chiampi M, Manzin A (2009) Homogenized magnetic properties of heterogeneous anisotropic structures including nonlinear media. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 45(10):3946–3949Google Scholar
  5. Daniel L, Corcolle R (2007) A note on the effective magnetic permeability of polycrystals. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 43(7):3153–3158Google Scholar
  6. Diguet G, Beaugnon E, Cavaillé J (2010) Shape effect in the magnetostriction of ferromagnetic composite. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 322(21):3337–3341Google Scholar
  7. Hultgren A, Tanase M, Felton EJ, Bhadriraju K, Salem AK, Chen CS, Reich DH (2005) Optimization of yield in magnetic cell separations using nickel nanowires of different lengths. Biotechnol Prog 21:509–515Google Scholar
  8. Kim YS, Whittle AJ (2006) Filtration in a porous granular medium: 2. application of bubble model to 1-d column experiments. Transport in Porous Media 65(2):309–335Google Scholar
  9. Lacoste D, Lubensky TC (2001) Phase transitions in a ferrofluid at magnetic-field-induced microphase separation. Physical Review E 64:041,506–1–041,506–8Google Scholar
  10. Mattei JL, Floc’h ML (2003) Percolative behaviour and demagnetizing effects in disordered heterostructures. J Magnetism Magnetic Mater 257(2-3):335–345Google Scholar
  11. Ngo AT, Pileni MP (2001) Assemblies of ferrite nanocrystals: Partial orientation of the easy magnetic axes. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 105(1):53–58Google Scholar
  12. Nielsch K,Wehrspohn RB, Barthel J, Kirschner J, Fischer SF, Kronmüller H, Schweinböck T,Weiss D, Gösele U (2002) High density hexagonal nickel nanowire array. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 249(1):234–240Google Scholar
  13. Ravnik J, Hriberšek M (2013) High gradient magnetic particle separation in viscous flows by 3D BEM. Computational Mechanics 51(4):465–474Google Scholar
  14. Sandulyak A, Sandulyak A, Ershova V, Polismakova M, Sandulyak D (2017a) Use of the magnetic test-filter for magnetic control of ferroimpurities of fuels, oils, and other liquids (phenomenological and physical models). Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 426:714–720Google Scholar
  15. Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA, Ershov DV, Sandulyak AA (2010) On the properties of short granular magnets with unordered granule chains: a field between the granules. Solid State Physics 52(10):2108–2115Google Scholar
  16. Sandulyak AA, Sandulyak DA, Ershova VA, Kiselev DO, Sandulyak AV (2015a) Finding out the commonalities in functional expressions for demagnetizing factor of quasi-solid and solid magnets. In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2015, WCE 2015, London, UK, Lecture Notes in Engineering and Computer Science, vol II, pp 1183–1185Google Scholar
  17. Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA, Sandulyak DA, Sandulyak AV, Polismakova MN, Kiselev VA (2016a) Modeling of tubular pores in free-flowing bulk media on the basis of quasi-facetted cells of such media. Glass and Ceramics 73(5):190–192Google Scholar
  18. Sandulyak AA, Polismakova MN, Sandulyak AV, Sandulyak DA, Khlustikov DS (2016b) Model of quasifaceted cells and possibility of its application to free-flowing materials. Glass and Ceramics 72(11):420–424Google Scholar
  19. Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA, Sandulyak DA, Sandulyak AV, Polismakova MN (2017b) Fills of co-sized and different-sized granules as quasi-ordered structures. Journal of Engineering Physics and Thermophysics 90(2):329–335Google Scholar
  20. Sandulyak AA, Polismakova MN, Kiselev DO, A SD, Sandulyak AV (2017c) On limiting the volume fraction of particles in the disperse sample (for the tasks on controlling their magnetic properties). Fine Chemical Technologies 12(3):58–64Google Scholar
  21. Sandulyak AV (1982) Model’ namagnichivaniya poristoy sredy (magnetization model of porous media, in Russ.). Technical Physics 52(11):2267–2269Google Scholar
  22. Sandulyak AV (1983) Physicheskaya model’ osagdeniya ferromagnitnykh chastiz v namagnichennoy granulirovannoy srede (physical model of sedimentation of ferrous particles in granulated media, in Russ.). Doklady Akademii nauk UkrSSR (9, iss. B):49–53Google Scholar
  23. Sandulyak AV (1984) Namagnichivaniye zepochki sharov (magnetization of the balls chain, in Russ.). Technical Electrodynamics (5):102–104Google Scholar
  24. Sandulyak AV, Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA (2007) Magnetization curve of a granulated medium in terms of the channel-by-channel magnetization model (new approach). Doklady Physics 52(4):179–181Google Scholar
  25. Sandulyak AV, Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA (2008) Functional correction to the classical expression for the average flow velocity in a closely packed granular bed. Theoretical Foundations of Chemical Engineering 42(2):220–224Google Scholar
  26. Sandulyak AV, Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA (2009) On the model of channel-by-channel magnetization of a granular medium (with a radial permeability profile of a quasi-continuous channel). Technical Physics 54(5):743–745Google Scholar
  27. Sandulyak DA, Sandulyak AA, Kiselev DO (2015b) Granular ferromagnets: Formulas for effective magnetic permeability. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Materials Engineering and Industrial Applications, Hong Kong, pp 261–266Google Scholar
  28. Sandulyak DA, Sleptsov VV, Sandulyak AA, Sandulyak AV, Ershova VA, Doroshenko AV (2015c) Filtration magnetophoresis process: an approach to choosing a speed regime. In: Rudas IJ (ed) Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanics, Mechatronics and Civil, Chemical and Industrial Engineering, Zakynthos Island, Greece, pp 72–76Google Scholar
  29. Sandulyak DA, Sandulyak AA, Ershova VA, Sandulyak AV, Kononov MA (2017d) Definition of pore tortuosity in granular medium ply based on model of quasi-faceted cells and pore-tubes. Glass and Ceramics 73(9):338–341Google Scholar
  30. Schulz L, SchirmacherW, Omran A, Shah SV, Böni P, PetryW, Müller-Buschbaum P (2010) Elastic torsion effects in magnetic nanoparticle diblock-copolymer structures. J Phys: Condens Matter 22:346,008Google Scholar
  31. Zhang DZ, M RR (2003) Effects of long and short relaxation times of particle interactions in dense and slow granular flows. In: Proc. of ASME FEDSM’ 03, 4th ASME_JSME Joint Fluids Engineering Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, vol 1, pp 579–582Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna A. Sandulyak
    • 1
    Email author
  • Darya A. Sandulyak
    • 1
  • Vera A. Ershova
    • 1
  • Alexander V. Sandulyak
    • 1
  1. 1.Moscow Technological UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations