Physics 4BL LAB 3: Magnetism

Partners:


Enrique A. Segura
Venudhar Ravinshankar.






Date: May 28
th
, 2014







Introduction
In the following report we will address Faradays Law by measuring magnetic fields and
also induced voltages in coils. Using a Hall probe, data is obtained to show the relationship
between magnetic field intensity and radial distance. In doing this report we will use correlation
data obtain through data analysis, linear regression. That coefficient will be address the data
obtain experimentally versus the expected results from theory. This value, R squared, is
meaningful, as its value is close to one, its correlation has a lesser degree of error.
Experimental Results
We conducted tests to assess the independence of the magnetic field regarding orientation
(in terms of the field; not of the Hall probe, as you will see before). Through experiments it is
observed that as distance is increased, between the source and the test object, the field weakens.
Moreover, it also mattered the orientation of the probe. If you have the probe flipped, the
measurements will give a negative magnitude, thus, showing the cross product we know from
theory. In this graph, the data for this experiment is recorded and showed.
Graph 1: Magnetic Field (in T) vs Radial Distance (m) for the First Experiment.

As you can see in the graph, it is not linear. If you notice at a specific field strength level
in the y-axis, there are several points in in the x-axis. And also, as distance is increase the data
points range (several points at a field strength) is decreased. This is consistent with the data we
obtained, which also stands with the theoretical expectations.
Moreover, there is an inquiry that needed some experiment work, for its importance: the
behavior of magnetic fields in between permanent magnets as orientation of the magnet is
changed with respect with the other. From theory we know that there is a cross product involved
0
0.00005
0.0001
0.00015
0.0002
0.00025
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
F
i
e
l
d

(
T
)

Distance (m)
Magnetic Field vs Radial Distance
Series1
with means the orientation, in form of an angle, is involved. The data was obtained at both
parallel, 0 degrees, and at 90 degrees.
Graph 2: Permanent Magnet Interaction (in T) vs distance at 90 Degrees.

Graph 3: Permanent Magnet Interaction (in T) vs distance at 0 Degrees.

0
0.00005
0.0001
0.00015
0.0002
0.00025
0.0003
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
M
a
g
n
e
t
i
c

F
i
e
l
d

(
T
)

Distance (m)
Permanent Magnetic Interaction at 90 Degrees
Series1
0
0.0001
0.0002
0.0003
0.0004
0.0005
0.0006
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
M
a
g
n
e
t
i
c

F
i
e
l
d

(
T
)

Distance (m)
Magnetic Strength at 0 degrees
Series1
It is important to see that the behavior of the magnetic field in between the two mirrors
each other, which reinforces the idea that magnetic field does not change, its physical
characteristics, with the minor exception of magnitude. And that is importance, the question of
magnitude. Magnitude does change when the magnets at perpendicular relative to each other.
The difference amounts to a factor of two from the parallel measurement to the perpendicular
orientation. In regards with vector direction, if the measurement is negative, it shows that the
probe position, respect with the field, is out of phase (flipped).
Theory gives us the following: there is a force due to magnetic fields. By means of a
digital balance, the mass reading of said balance can be used to obtain the force between two
permanent magnets and show the relation between force and the magnetic field as distance
changes. The following graph shows that.
Graph 4: Magnetic Force (in N) vs Distance Ratio (1/m) between Permanent Magnets.


Let me clarify the ratio, and why is it used instead of just distance instead of the shown 1/
distance. The issue is that with the ratio it is clear the relation from theory and it correlates with
our data so far as to show that at the closest range between the magnets the force is strongest. If
you use only distance you get the reverse of this graph and it is harder to visualize that way. This
graph reinforces the idea that we have seen before, and backed by data obtained, that proximity
relates to field strength, and by extension, its force, and provided there is no angle in between the
magnets, the obtained measure is the highest.
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0 10 20 30 40 50
M
a
g
n
e
t
i
c

F
o
r
c
e

(
N
)

DIstance Ratio (1/m)
Magnetic Force vs Distance Ratio
Series1
Now, let us move forward to Faradays Law. We know that a changing magnetic field,
from theory, if taken the rate of change of the magnetic field, creates an induced emf, or in this
case, induced voltage. Moreover, let us also include Lenzs law, which address the vector
direction of said emf, and moreover, it can also, tell us the direction of the field. The following
graph shows the relation between voltages versus time in this scenario.
Graph 5: Induced Voltage vs Time

In this graph, the amplitude of the sinusoidal wave, which is the induced voltage, is
around 1.88exp(-3).
And in this graph, the same process is done to the data obtained to show the induced
current.









-1.00E-02
-8.00E-03
-6.00E-03
-4.00E-03
-2.00E-03
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
1.00E-02
1.20E-02
0.00E+00 2.00E-03 4.00E-03 6.00E-03 8.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.20E-02 V
o
l
t
a
g
e

(
V
)

Time (s)
Induced Voltage vs Time
Graph 6: Induced Current vs Time.


In this graph, by the same logic, the induced current is around 4 exp(-3) amperes.
Analysis
We want to show the behavior of magnetic fields due to distance ratio in an
approximation of a line a charge.
Graph 7: Radio Distance vs Magnetic Field

-5.00E-03
-4.00E-03
-3.00E-03
-2.00E-03
-1.00E-03
0.00E+00
1.00E-03
2.00E-03
3.00E-03
4.00E-03
5.00E-03
0.00E+00 2.00E-03 4.00E-03 6.00E-03 8.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.20E-02
C
u
r
r
e
n
t

(
A
)

Time (s)
Induced Current vs Time
0
0.00005
0.0001
0.00015
0.0002
0.00025
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
R
a
t
i
o

D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

(
1
/
m
)

Magnetic Field (T)
Ratio Distance vs Magnetic Field
When implemented linear regression, this is the data obtained:
Summary Output:



Regression Statistics


Multiple R 0.702884562


R Square 0.494046708


Adjusted R Square 0.465938192


Standard Error 4.23659E-05


Observations 20



ANOVA


df SS MS
Regression 1 3.15474E-08 3.15E-08
Residual 18 3.23076E-08 1.79E-09
Total 19 6.3855E-08


Coefficients Standard Error t Stat
Intercept 6.2974E-05 1.68708E-05 3.732727
X Variable 1 2.67143E-06 6.37204E-07 4.192423

The correlation factor is the one on the second row of the table. While statistically
speaking is not promising as it is lower than half of the 1, which is shows how close and error
free the data is. However, from a physical standpoint, I will argue that the experimental data
shows that experiments do show promise and accuracy.
Graph 8: Distance Ratio vs Magnetic Field at Parallel (0 degrees)

0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

R
a
t
i
o

Magnetic Field
Distance Ratio vs Magnetic Field at 0 Degrees
Series1
And here is the summary output for regression:
SUMMARY
OUTPUT



Regression Statistics


Multiple R 0.503081


R Square 0.253091


Adjusted R Square 0.226415


Standard Error 0.000126


Observations 30



ANOVA


df SS MS F
Regression 1 1.5E-07 1.5E-07 9.487811
Residual 28 4.42E-07 1.58E-08

Total 29 5.92E-07


Coefficients
Standard
Error t Stat P-value
Intercept 0.000136 2.35E-05 5.780089 3.31E-06
X Variable 1 4.92E-11 1.6E-11 3.080229 0.004602

Graph 9: Dipole Interaction Magnetic Field vs Distance Ratio.


And here is the linear regression data:
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0 10 20 30 40 50
M
a
g
n
e
t
i
c

F
i
e
l
d
(
T
)

Ratio Distance
Magnetic Field vs Distance Ratio
SUMMARY OUTPUT



Regression Statistics


Multiple R 0.610031


R Square 0.372138


Adjusted R
Square 0.351209


Standard Error 0.059006


Observations 32



ANOVA


df SS MS F
Regression 1 0.061908 0.061908 17.78122
Residual 30 0.10445 0.003482

Total 31 0.166359


Coefficients
Standard
Error t Stat P-value
Intercept 0.150914 0.027771 5.434269 6.84E-06
X Variable 1 -0.00449 0.001065 -4.21678 0.00021

I have to admit that the R square correlation factor is too low means that this data does
not fit well, speaking statistically. However, please take note of the graphs, as they do
contemplate the behavior expected from theory.

Conclusion
As for the statistics, I am sad to report that it did not work out; my results do not fit well.
So in that account, my data analysis does not aid the case for Faradays law. However, looking at
data, we can see trends that helps see the physics behind the experiment. And in those accounts,
we have meet the goal of showing the validity of experiments.