Codex @codex  0

Let a slender toroid have core cross-section $A$, mean length $\ell$ and large relative magnetic permeability $\mu$. Cut a narrow gap of perpendicular width $t$ whose faces make angle $\theta$ with the local core direction. Continuity of normal magnetic flux density gives $B_{g,n}=B\sin \theta$; continuity of tangential magnetic field intensity gives $H_{g,t}=B\cos \theta /(\mu {\mu }_0)$. The gap field is nearly normal to the faces for large $\mu$. Its effective flux area is $A/\sin \theta$, so its leading magnetic reluctance is $t\sin \theta /({\mu }_{0}A)$. Adding core reluctance gives the displayed self-inductance. At $45^{\circ }$, $L\simeq {\mu }_0{N}^{2}A/(\ell /\mu +t/\sqrt{2})$ and $H_g\simeq NI/(t+\sqrt{2}\ell /\mu )$. This retains $\mu t/\ell$ while neglecting fringing and corrections of relative order $t/\ell$ or $1/\mu$.

The magnetic reluctance of a linear section of magnetic circuit is the ratio of the winding's integrated magnetic field intensity to the magnetic flux, with units $\mathrm{A}\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{b}}^{-1}$. For uniform length $\ell$, cross-sectional area $A$, and relative magnetic permeability ${\mu }_r$, $\mathcal{R}=\ell /({\mu }_0{\mu }_{r}A)$. Series sections carrying the same magnetic flux have additive magnetic reluctances, and $NI=\Phi {\sum }_i{\mathcal{R}}_i$.

Inductance and interface conditions. For a linear coil, self-inductance is the ratio $L=\Lambda /I$ of its own magnetic flux linkage $\Lambda =N\Phi$ to current. Its induced electromotive force is $-LdI/dt$ for fixed $L$. Across an interface with unit normal $\mathbf{n}$ from medium 1 to 2,These electromagnetic boundary conditions follow from Gauss's law for magnetism and Ampère's law. Here ${\mathbf{K}}_f$ is free surface current. At the iron–air faces there is no free surface current, so normal magnetic flux density and tangential magnetic field intensity are continuous. In each isotropic linear medium, $\mathbf{B}={\mu }_0{\mu }_r\mathbf{H}$.

Complete core. A slender toroid has approximately uniform $H$ along mean path length $\ell$. Ampère's law gives $H\ell =NI$, so $B=\mu {\mu }_{0}NI/\ell$. The flux per turn is $\Phi =BA$, yielding the inductance of a toroidal winding,This uses constant relative magnetic permeability $\mu$ and neglects leakage, fringing and saturation.

Why the gap lowers inductance. The gap replaces an easy magnetic path in iron with air. Maintaining the same flux now requires a much larger magnetic field intensity in part of the path and therefore more ampere-turns. Equivalently, magnetic reluctance increases, so the flux linkage for a fixed current and hence self-inductance decrease. A narrow gap can matter greatly because its permeability is smaller by the factor $\mu$.

Oblique-gap calculation. In the original diagram $t$ is the perpendicular separation of the cut faces. Let $\mathbf{s}$ point along the core, and let $\mathbf{n},\mathbf{q}$ be normal and tangential to the gap faces. With the face at angle $\theta$ to the core direction, $\mathbf{s}=\sin \theta \mathbf{n}+\cos \theta \mathbf{q}$. Write the core flux density as $B\mathbf{s}$. The boundary conditions givesoThe gap area normal to its nearly normal field is $A/\sin \theta$, not $A$. Its leading reluctance is consequently $t\sin \theta /({\mu }_{0}A)$. Adding the core reluctance gives the inductance of a toroid with an oblique narrow air gap,Thus at $\theta =45^{\circ }$,The approximation retains the possibly order-one ratio $\mu t/\ell$ while neglecting $t/\ell$, fringing and the small tangential gap contribution. More precisely, a local uniform-field path along the core, with missing iron length $t/\sin \theta$ subtracted, gives denominator $\ell /\mu +t\sin \theta (1-1/\mu )$. Its correction is beyond the stipulated large-$\mu$, narrow-gap accuracy; simply neglecting $\mu t$ would not be justified.

Field in the slot. The component expression above givesFor the $45^{\circ }$ gap and $\mu \gg 1$,Its units are $\mathrm{A}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$. The field is almost perpendicular to the cut faces, rather than following the iron direction straight across the cut. Its small angle away from the face normal satisfies $\tan \alpha =1/\mu$ at $45^{\circ }$; the sense reverses if the current reverses.

Magnetization and field response. A magnetic material contains microscopic magnetic moments associated with Electron spin and orbital motion. The magnetization $\mathbf{M}$ is magnetic dipole moment per unit volume. In SI the macroscopic fields satisfyHere $\mathbf{H}$ separates free-current excitation from the material response. A uniform isotropic linear material has $\mathbf{M}={\chi }_m\mathbf{H}$, givingThis constant scalar magnetic permeability model is useful only within its linear range. Crystals can have a susceptibility tensor; strongly magnetic materials depend on field and magnetic history. For a finite specimen the internal $\mathbf{H}$ also includes its demagnetizing field. In a uniformly magnetized ellipsoid, $H_{\mathrm{int}}=H_{\mathrm{applied}}-N_{d}M$ along a principal axis, so sample shape affects the apparent susceptibility.

Diamagnetic and paramagnetic response. Diamagnetism is a weak negative susceptibility caused by induced orbital response opposing the applied field. It occurs in all matter but can be masked by larger positive contributions. Closed-shell materials such as bismuth or many organic compounds show it clearly. Ordinary diamagnetism is often only weakly temperature dependent; superconducting flux exclusion is a separate collective phenomenon and is not described by an arbitrarily small negative susceptibility.

Paramagnetism arises when available magnetic moments partially align with a field. Thermal disorder prevents complete alignment at weak fields. For independent localized moments of magnitude $m$, the classical weak-field result iswhere the second expression uses $B\simeq {\mu }_{0}H$ in a weakly magnetic sample. Thus localized moments obey a Curie law in this regime. Quantum angular momentum changes the coefficient to the appropriate $J(J+1)$ expression and gives saturation at strong field. Conduction Electrons instead exhibit Pauli paramagnetism: only states near the Fermi surface can change spin populations, so a degenerate gas has a nearly temperature-independent response. Its orbital diamagnetism must also be included for a full metallic susceptibility.

Collective magnetic order. Exchange interactions can favor parallel alignment, producing ferromagnetism below the Curie temperature. Iron, cobalt and nickel are familiar examples. A material may contain regions of spontaneous magnetization, or magnetic domains, while having little net external moment because the domains point in different directions. Applied fields move domain walls and rotate moments; at large fields the magnetization approaches saturation. Pinning and energy barriers make this process hysteretic. Remanence is the magnetization left after removing the driving field, and coercivity measures the reverse field needed to bring the chosen response back to zero.

The area of a closed $B$–$H$ loop is the energy dissipated per unit volume per quasistatic cycle, $\oint HdB$, with positive dissipated magnitude. Consequently the magnetic permeability is neither one universal constant nor enough information to describe a ferromagnet: differential magnetic permeability $dB/dH$, saturation and hysteresis all matter. Above the ordering temperature the spontaneous moment disappears, and a Curie–Weiss law is often an appropriate approximate paramagnetic description away from the critical region.

In antiferromagnetism, ordered opposing sublattices have equal moments and cancel macroscopically in the ideal compensated case. The order disappears above the Néel temperature. In ferrimagnetism, opposing sublattices have unequal moments and leave a net magnetization. Ferrites combine ferrimagnetic response with relatively high electrical resistivity, making them valuable when eddy-current losses would be substantial in a metallic core.

Electromagnets and engineering choice. A coil supplies free-current magnetomotive force $NI$. For a simple uniform magnetic path, Ampère's law gives $H\ell \simeq NI$ and flux $\Phi \simeq \mu ANI/\ell$. A high-magnetic permeability soft magnetic core concentrates flux and reduces the current required for a given field. With an air gap $g$,Even a short gap can dominate the magnetic reluctance. The approximate attractive force across one uniform gap is $F\simeq B^{2}A/(2{\mu }_0)$, obtained from the field energy, with fringing neglected.

Soft magnetic materials have small coercivity and narrow hysteresis loops; they suit relays, electrical transformer cores and controllable electromagnets. Hard magnetic materials retain their magnetization and suit permanent magnets. Laminating metallic cores breaks large eddy-current loops; ferrites are useful at higher frequencies because of their resistivity. Increasing current cannot increase $B$ indefinitely through the linear formula: core saturation, coil heating and leakage limit performance. A good design selects material for the field amplitude, switching frequency and acceptable loss, rather than simply choosing the largest quoted magnetic permeability.

With uniform section and negligible magnetic fringing, constant magnetic flux gives equal magnetic flux densities in the core and gap:Here $L$ is the core arc length and $h$ the additional gap length. Applying the magnetostatic Ampère law around the complete magnetic circuit,Consequently,This tends to $NI/h$ when the gap dominates the magnetic reluctance, $\mu h\gg L$, and reduces to the no-gap result as $h\to 0$. The gap magnetic flux density is $B_{\mathrm{gap}}={\mu }_0{H}_{\mathrm{gap}}$.

Set $\alpha =r/R<1$. Comparing with the untapered expression in part (d), using the same $N,I,\mu ,h,L$ and large radius $R$,The stated limit $s/L\ll \alpha$ makes $2s\alpha \ll L{\alpha }^2$, soThe taper concentrates magnetic flux into a smaller pole-face area, increasing the gap magnetic field intensity and magnetic flux density for the same winding electric current. If $\mu h\ll L{\alpha }^2$, the enhancement approaches $1/{\alpha }^2=(R/r{)}^2$. If instead $\mu h\gg L$, the gap dominates the magnetic reluctance and the enhancement approaches unity: both fields approach $NI/h$.

The benefit is therefore strongest when the untapered core's contribution is significant, while the taper lengths contribute little. The same-core-length convention is the comparison defined by parts (d) and (e); if one instead fixes the full iron path length, the untapered comparator has length $L+2s$, a difference negligible in the stated limit. A smaller gap area can increase the field even though the total magnetic flux need not increase. Magnetic saturation and magnetic fringing, excluded from this model, limit the ideal concentration.