Talk:Neodymium magnet

Patents

Article should discuss patent and licensing concerns. What are the costs? When do patents expire?

Article should explain "grades"

Both KJ and Gaussboys give "grades" for their magnets (N38, N42, N45 etc.), but don't explain what exactly these mean, other than that higher grades mean stronger magnets. Can anyone shed light on that? Does it have to do with the purity of the material used to build the magnet?

I think this should definitely be covered in the article. -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 22:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The typically listed "grade" of a magnet usually refers to the Maximum Energy Product or BHmax. In c.g.s. the units are in Mega-Gauss*Oersted, (MGOe) and they are more internationally known in S.I. units as Joules per cubic meter (J/m^3).

The "N, ND, or NS" prefix usually means Neodymium Iron Boron magnet alloy and the "Grade/number value" suggests that the alloy has a Maximum Energy Product of 38 MGOe. This magnetic characteristic is volume independent and only gives you an idea of what the net magnetic field of a magnet with a particular geometry will be.

The "grade" or Maximum Energy Product is usually not used in an calculations beyond first order and it is really not important in designing with strait line materials. Strait line magnet alloys have a strait normal curve in the II quaddrant their Hysterisis curve at moderate temperatures. The "grade" does help compare similar magnet alloys. This convention is also used in Samarium Cobalt alloys, but these usually start with a "S" or "SC".

Most Neodymium Iron Boron manufacturers allow a tolerance of ±10% on the Maximum Energy Product and this is specified in the MMPA/IMA magnet stanadrds. The International Magnet Association (IMA) is the old Magnetic Materials Producers Association (MMPA)and they have adopted the MMPA standards and definitions.

Usually a higher grade is stronger, but one vendor's strong N38 may be another vendor's weak N40. The grade impact will be transparent to most general purpose users, but industrial users should review the other three primary magnetic characteristics of a permanent magnet; Residual Induction (Br), Coercive Force (Hc) and the Intrinsic Coercive force (Hci). 72.240.22.233 00:13, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that the paragraphs in the "Caution" section should rightfully be reversed. Some people may disagree, but flesh wounds are for the most part worse than equipment damage. And these things can really pinch let me assure you. (71.233.165.69 00:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC))

• They can do a lot more than just pinch. Larger ones at higher grades are strong enough to attract things from even across a room at high speed. Make sure all your tool boxes and any loose metallic items are secured when moving one.

If somebody is wondering how to expand this article, a section about how those magnet are created would be great! :-) Peter S. 00:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. How are Neodymium magnets made?!? ^_^ Jumping cheese ^Contact 08:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

would also like to know exactly how they're made. I've also read comments to the effect that they fade over time - is there any truth behind this? verifiable stuff only please (with citations). dreamcatcher23 (talk) 22:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

They don't seem to fade much, they're very stable, provided they don't get too hot. If you want to see how they are made, check out Supermagnetman's explanation: [1]- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 03:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Aspirin?

The article mentions toys containing neodymium magnets the size and shape of aspirin tablets. Can someone please replace this with a proper measurement? Even the original Bayer Aspirin is available in different shapes and sizes, let alone all the different stuff called "Aspirin" which is available in the USA. --BjKa 13:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The size of one of these magnets is 2-4 millimeters in diameter and the same high.

Serious error in the Caution section?

The caution section states that neodymium magnets are not strong enough to pull a paperclip through a hand. I imagine as this is in the "Caution" section, that the intended meaning is that they are able to do that? Then, it should urgently be corrected. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.139.254.221 (talk • contribs).

No - I don't think any consumer neodymium magnet could come close to pulling a paperclip through a hand. I have two 1" cube neodymium magnets and while they can create an uncomfortable pressure when placed above and below a hand, I can't imagine any magnet available to the public pulling an object through a hand. -SCEhardT 22:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought 1" NIB could break fingers, I find 12mm cubes cause the most pressure I would like to experance, maybe I have week hands. Alan2here 16:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I also have two 1" cube N45 grade neodymium magnets. As he has said they can give an uncomfortable pressure but it does not really hurt. They can give you a bad pinch though if you let them roll off your hand. My younger brother (younger by 2 years) was stupid and let them come together when he sat down holding one in each hand so that they pryed his fingers apart and snapped together. He got a blood blister that lasted a day or so. I yesterday myself let them come together in a different way and pinched the side of my finger slightly. Looking at it now I can see the red line on the finger still, but it does not hurt anymore. But they are definitely not strong enough to pull things through your hand. You have to remember with your small magnets that pressure is applied over an area. With 1" magnets while the force is stronger the area is a little over four times as much as 12mm magnets. If I focus that into a 12mm area (it is hard to do as you are also getting the magnets farther apart when you do so) it does feel a little stronger, but still bearable.Ergzay (talk) 08:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

They definitely can hold up items on another side of your hand. They could not literally pull the item through the hand causing a large cut by any means. Looking at the citation given ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=NKZgGTD0qic ) it has nothing to do with pulling paperclips or objects through hands and looking about I can find no episode that shows so. Aicchalmers 18:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I did find one article about Mythbusters and pulling paperclips through hands (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machines/4199615.html) in which Adam specifically says that it is impossible. So I am removing the incorrect statement and citation.

One of my hobbies is collecting (very strong) magnets, and In my experience, the strongest ones aren't nearly the strength to pull a paper clip through a hand, unless it was a very sharp paperclip. ^one/_zero 20:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

it seems to me that the confusion is caused by ambiguity of english: "pulling through the hand" could mean: A) that the magnetic field on the other side of the hand is strong enough to pull on a ferromagnetic object or B) that it forces such an object through the hand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.49.102.59 (talk) 14:36, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Keeper

A seller of these [[2]] says they do not require a soft iron keeper across the poles to prevent loss of magnetic strength over time, as alnico magnets do. Could someone please find a reliable source for this, and an explanation in thems of the properties of the materials, the hysteresis curve, or whatever. Thanks Edison 15:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

While I do not understand the science of such loss you mentioned, I do not think that it is so. In all my looking up about Neodymium magnets (and personal experience with them), although limited, I have not seen anything about them weakening over time. As the article states if they get over a certain temperature they start to lose strength, but I have not seen on any site that sells them (including highly reliable sites like http://www.unitednuclear.com ) anything about them weakening over time. Ergzay (talk) 08:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

AlNiCo magnets have a lower Curie temperature. As with all thermally-activated transitions from a metastable state, the weakening of ferromagnets theoretically happens at all times and temperatures, it just appears to stop.

A keeper might be a good idea if your magnets are going to be heated to within a few tens of degrees of their Curie temperature. I imagine the process won't be too noticeable in most events; maybe faster than diamond transforming into graphite, but still too slow to notice.--128.115.27.10 (talk) 17:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Neodymium loudspeakers can stand a higher power (up to nearly 3 times the power) of an ordinary speaker.

According to Eden Electronic research lab these speakers also create a greater heat. This heat will result in the magnets losing their precision, and thus the speaker losing clarity and their defined sound over a time period of a couple of years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProDigit (talk • contribs) 07:00, 17 May 2006

--hmmmmm, thinking about this a bit and I believe precision is not the right word, should be power, so the spk might become less efficient and if in a 2,3,4 spk sytem freq response would suffer, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wblakesx (talk • contribs) 18:25, 21 November 2006

What you say is correct, tho if the speaker loses its magnetic field due to heat, a result is a loss in power, and in clarity. Imagine a 15" coned speaker being driven by a magnet the size of a small pill. Not only will the small magnetic field be too weak to move the cone; the sound will also be deformed, lacking bottom end, and high (or crisp) sound, due to the delay that the mass of the cone causes.

According to more information I have received, the Neo magnet reacts different in sound than a standard magnet. The sound in audio speaker systems driven by Neo magnets similar to standard magnets seem to lack some form of bottom end. This problem can be helped by lengthening the magnet, making it more punchy, though above 'trick' will not create speakers delivering a sound true to their source (so it seems).

Much like the former Alnico 5 magnets, the Neo magnets with a higher percentage of neodymium will lose their magnetic field faster than ones with less Neodymium in the alloy. The drawback of decreasing Neodymium in the magnet is that it will result in heavier magnets, having less magnetic field.

---

Aren't they used in permanent magnet motors? any comments? And as far as speakers go, musicians don't necessarily want perfect speakers. What do they think of Neod speakers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wblakesx (talk • contribs) 17:04, 19 November 2006

Sony is using this Neodymium in their latest headphones. [3]

External Links

I was wondering if anyone had opinions on my adding a link to a site that sells a wide variety of Neodymium and Samarium Cobalt magnets. The only drawback is that in addition to selling magnets for normal uses he also sells "medical" versions for the so called magnet therapy.

Here's the link for those interested to review, I'm new to editing so opinions on the appropriateness of this link are welcome.

Engineered Concepts (Super Magnet Man)

Fatal shadow 00:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

http://www.unitednuclear.com/ also has a nice setup and they also include warnings and info about magnets and (IMO) a more user friendly site. The direct page for their magnet page is at: http://www.unitednuclear.com/magnets.htm The only drawback is that they only ship to within the United States. It might be a possibly good idea if we are going to put them down to put them both down. They also sell larger magnets than that website. Also all their magnets are N45 grade. Ergzay (talk) 09:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it's OK to add these, provided there's no financial connection between the editor and the company at all, and you're linking to technical informational pages, not sales pages. We value good information in the wikipedia I think and we're not precluded from linking to data sheets and similar.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 02:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Free energy

I'm 15 and I'm fascinated with the new development of 'free energy' I saw on YouTube by developers who are using magnetic fields to defy the laws of science and have created a perpetual motion machine== http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNDIWY19gqA&mode=related&search= == I think their discovery will go down in history as the greatest of all time. And I really admire that they are going to give the technology for free to 3rd world nations to level the playing field. I'm guessing that the magnets they are using are one from the family of super magnets but does anyone know or have an idea which kind of magnet they might be using?Sasha2991 07:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Please my friend do not be fooled by things like these. I am 18. 'free energy' is impossible. It cannot be discovered because it breaks all rules of physics. You CANNOT defy physics. There are at times when you can exploit loopholes in the physics, but this is a rare case. Every single "free energy" device in history has been invented by people who do not know physics and have just discovered something that people already knew about and what they are really doing is using energy from someplace they do not understand. That video really makes sky news look quite bad and show how ignorant they are. If you look into it, you will find no where that they actually tell what they do. What they are really doing is lying through their teeth to get publicity for whatever other products they are selling. Whey they talk about nonsense like "religious" and other nonsense is because the rules of thermodynamics really are completely solid. People misunderstand electromagnetism a lot or try and make other people misunderstand it to make them think they are actually making energy.Ergzay (talk) 09:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I haven't looked too far into this particular case - but I'd be wary. Such "free energy" things usually fall into two categories - either they're wrong (the physics isn't understood and the energy is coming from someplace they don't know about - like heat from the environment, the turning of the earth, the energy that can be stored in non-permanent magnets etc.) or they're wrong AND they're a scam, aimed to con investors out of their money. As a physicist, I know it's shortsighted to say something can or can't be done with absolute certainty, as we've had so many examples in the past of people being proved wrong. However, with the current understanding of physics "free energy" machines are (sadly) a impossible. Until someone is willing to allow their invention to be fully investigated and documented by able, qualified people, it's best to avoid being drawn in by such hype & pseudoscience. dreamcatcher23 (talk) 14:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

N and BH(Max)

In the specifications of many magnets, it shows BH(Max) as a range of MGOe (for example, http://www.hitachimetals.com/product/permanentmagnets/neodymium/properties.cfm), and the "N" rating appears to be a bit lower than the median of that range. The article says, "The number after the N represents the magnetic energy product, in megagauss-oersteds (MGOe)..." The Hitachi Metals page shows that their HS-55AH product has a range of 53-56MGOe, but I've seen no indication that this is marketed as an N56 magnet. Does anyone know how the "N" number is being calculated from the BH(Max) range? I think the article would be improved by adding that detail. Fungicord (talk) 11:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

One more reference

I noted that all references are for commerical sites. The following one has (comparatively) lots of useful info:

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/faq.asp

as we know, 99% of the world neodymium magnets is produced in china, you can come here to find all kinds of magnets from grade35 to grade 52. http://buyneomagnets.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.89.22.26 (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.omomagnets.com/index.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:CE8:6B:E:0:0:8CF7:0 (talk) 07:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

https://www.umagnets.com/ find lot size of magnets with disc, block, rings and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.94.138.125 (talk) 09:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

For example if you're interested in temperature dependance, you get actual data at this site (unlike most others).

I don't feel like adding it in the article though, since then probably someone will accuse me for adding commercial links.. --88.131.22.138 (talk) 14:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

NIB wiping credit cards

I once saw in a mythbusters episode where they did wipe a credit card with a NIB it was in the eel wallet episode does that count as a citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.121.21 (talk) 16:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Probably not. You need a written citation on an actual web page or printed publication. Ginbot86 (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

It does count if you know which episode it was, and can quote it accurately; citations don't have to be printed materials.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 16:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is the price relevant???

Under "Description", it states that "As of 2008 neodymium magnets cost about $44/kg, $1.40 per BHmax.". I had removed this information since I feel it's irrelevant to an encyclopedic entry.

Someone then undid my revision, and re-instated the price.

I am removing this information once more, since I stand by my assertion that price information is irrelevant to the description of a magnet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.216.212 (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you assert that a rough idea of price is irrelevant. With all due respect, I completely disagree, it is part of knowledge to have an idea what the material costs of things are; and on the contrary IMO all materials should have this.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 23:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Relative cost is fine in my opinion also. On the other hand, the numerous links to particular companies selling their wares is inappropriate. Wellspring (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

External links to commercial site

Different topic: What's the Wikipedia policy on posting commercial sites? I see a listing of a site that sells magnets, but then, what's to stop ten others from listing their sites too? Or, is listing a commercial site where neodymium magnets are available for sale OK? I ask, because I want to add an external link to a great magnet pull-strength calculator I found at the KJ site. Thoughts? Mc013579 (talk) 02:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC) Mc013579

In general, no links to commercial sites should be listed. You can read Wikipedia's policy here: WP:EL Deli nk (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I've read that policy, and it does not say that, "no links to commercial sites should be listed." It does say, "#14 (No) Lists of links to manufacturers, suppliers or customers." This isn't that. While I agree that we shouldn't have posting links to half a dozen different magnet suppliers, a link to a useful tool should be acceptable. So, deleting the link to Magnequench is fine (it was just a link to their general site, a place you can buy magnets). However, the link to the kjmagnetics magnet calculator (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp) is a pretty useful tool. While it is on a commercial site that also sells magnets, it seems to be a unique tool that's a freely available resource. Appropriate, no? Mc013579

omomagnets neodymium magnets (http://www.omomagnets.com/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:E42:102:1513:160:16:75:94 (talk) 09:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Brass wedges

An interesting item I came across was a passing reference to brass wedges in some text referring to working with large high-flux magnets, such as NdFeB. They must be for keeping magnets from snapping together, as well as for prying them apart. I just wrote the safety note about not pulling free when one starts to get pinched, and it's based on personal experience. In my case, I was foolish and did pull free, and left a little "biological sample" between the magnets. My injury was not serious and healed quickly, but just before I broke free, the squeeze was like that of the jaws of a pair of high-leverage pliers being handled my somebody both physically strong and malicious. Nikevich (talk) 11:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

some more info on grades of these magnets

Material : Nd2Fe14B + other rare earth material Properties: N35,N38,N40,N42,N45,N48,N50,N52 working temperature:80 deg. N33M,N35M,N38M,N40M,N42M,N45M,N50M working temperature:100 deg. N30H,N33H,N35H,N38H,N40H,N42H,N45H,N48H working temperature:120 deg. N30SH,N33SH,N35SH,N38SH,N40SH,N42SH,N45SH working temperature:150 deg. N28UH,N30UH,N35UH,N38UH,N40UH working temperature:180 deg. N38EH,N30EH,N35EH,N38EH working temperature:200 deg.

I found this on a manufacturer's website thoght it may help with the grades question —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.131.229.64 (talk) 06:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Great information! Go ahead and add it to the article. Do you still have the address of the website so a reference to the source can be included? --Chetvorno^TALK 06:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Warning

These devices are new on the market. That means poor experience with handling. Therefore some risks are relevant. Children may be seriously injured, when there are some of this small pieces are in the stomach. Elektronic devices are easily destroyed. Datas stored on magnetic devices may be cleared. No sewing, drilling etc ist allowed. A remark should be added. Excuse my English.--Kölscher Pitter (talk) 10:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Added a section on 'Hazards' covering these points. --Chetvorno^TALK 16:58, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Date

From the introduction: "This material is currently the strongest type of permanent magnet." There should be a date, or at least a year. c.pergiel (71.117.211.59 (talk) 06:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC))

Yes, usually we put a template which inserts current date, but in this case, things don't change quickly and if there is a stronger magnet, you'll hear that in the news :-) Materialscientist (talk) 06:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Size/strength/proximity limits

To address certain urban myths, is there a point where two magnets attract each other so strongly that if they were to get too close to each other, they would destroy each other? 213.66.207.185 (talk) 13:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The material is very brittle, and if two magnets are allowed to get close enough to "snap" together, they may hit each other with enough force to chip and shatter. Is that what you were referring to? --Chetvorno^TALK 16:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I added a section on 'Hazards' covering this. --Chetvorno^TALK 16:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Resistivity error

Resistivity should read 160 micro ohms-cm, the "m" as written may seem misleading. http://www.kjmagnetics.com/specs.asp <a href="http://www.omomagnets.com/index.php?controller=categorylist&id_category=8">Neodymium Disc Magnets</a> ?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.253.49.6 (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Pfft.

NIB magnèts' specific impulse is only 11 m/s. Maybe this is why it's better to put them in series in any Gauss gun, until they shatter. For that, I need to find their celerity. -lysdexia 19:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.35.37.133 (talk)

Broken rewrite

During this series of edits, a user with an apparent COI significantly rewrote the article and a lot of old material was lost. Unfortunately nobody seems to have noticed this at the time. The pre-rewrite version should be examined for useful content and that content re-added, along with fixing the parts of the article which have been broken since that time (for instance, the "[1]" pseudo-reference which the COI editor presumably intended to refer to the website added during the rewrite). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Flux vs Field Gradient

Please describe why flux or field gradient is correct and what would cause a valid description of the nature of such a device to fail to qualify as a valid entry when written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.247.50.141 (talk) 18:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Flux is the intensity of the field, gradient is the difference in the intensity over a certain distance divided by that distance (i.e. spatial speed of changes). The field itself acts only on moving objects whereas the gradient acts on the stationary objects too. The reference you were adding is not a reliable source. Materialscientist (talk) 22:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Relative Strength of AlNiCo and NdFeB Magnets

I recently took a class discussing these magnets, and the ubiquity of NdFeB in technology (like earbud headphones) has more to do with their ability to hold onto their magnetic field than the strength of their magnetic field. The AlNiCo technically have a slightly stronger field (specifically, increased magnetic flux density), but they become demagnetized easily in the presence of other magnetic fields. Because NdFeB magnets have comparable strength and do not demagnetize as easily, they have largely replaced AlNiCo magnets, especially in applications where there is frequent exposure to magnetic fields such as in speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.97.166.196 (talk) 12:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Neodymium transformer?

I was wondering, since neodymium is so good for magnets, it would be an awesome material for electric transformers, they would be way smaller and lighter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granito diaz (talk • contribs) 00:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

That's a good thought, but actually it's just the opposite; the neodymium alloy (NdFeB) used in magnets would make a terrible transformer core. In addition to high magnetic permeability, alloys used for magnets must have high coercivity (a wide hysteresis loop) which means it takes a lot of energy to reverse their magnetization, so the magnet will be very hard to demagnetize. These are called hard ferromagnetic materials. However in a transformer core the magnetic field is constantly reversing, 120 times per second, because of the alternating current. So you want a magnetic material with low coercivity, that takes very little energy to reverse the magnetization (long narrow hysteresis loop), because the energy required to reverse the magnetic field is wasted as heat (core losses). These are called soft magnetic materials. NdFeB has some of the highest coercivity values known. --Chetvorno^TALK 02:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

(HA~7 teslas) needs a description

This is in the 'description' section.

What does HA mean? Link to something or spell it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.65.182.51 (talk) 20:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Neodymium magnet and ceramics

Hi all... I appreciate the time taken to read this.

I was wondering if a Neodymium magnet can be melted in a kiln and yet maintain its magnetic capacities.

Hebert Peró (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC) Hi! The answer is not, the magnet will not maintain its magnetization if its temperature rises above the Curie Point. If the structure of the molecules are not affected by the heat applied, it will be possible to magnetize it again. To shape a magnet, it must be industrially sintered, then magnetized. Other alternative is to mix neodymium powder with epoxy, fusing the mixture in the desired shape. (I am not sure, but I believe that Talkpages are not for the purpose of "talking", but only for discussing topics to improve the quality of the associated page, isn´t it?)

Magnet Coating

"two-layered copper-nickel plating "

This is not right. The standard plating is nickel-copper-nickel. I work for one of the major magnet companies in the US, and no one has ever spec'd out Cu-Ni. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.8.36.5 (talk) 12:22, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Could you provide a reference to a WP:RS? Reify-tech (talk) 13:34, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Neodymium magnet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110717163453/http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22 to http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Neodymium magnet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124031719/http://www.intl-magnetics.org/pdfs/0100-00.pdf to http://www.intl-magnetics.org/pdfs/0100-00.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150721003433/http://www.magnequench.com/assets/content/magnequench/mag_ref/mag_pps/pps_040701/IEEE2004_vMAG40.pdf to http://www.magnequench.com/assets/content/magnequench/mag_ref/mag_pps/pps_040701/IEEE2004_vMAG40.pdf/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160123164156/http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/05/sharkmagnets to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/05/sharkmagnets

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect Number of Unpaired Electrons

In the Description section, it states that the reason neodymium has such a strong magnetic moment is because it has 7 unpaired electrons. The associated source confirms this, but neodymium only has 4 unpaired electrons in the 4f energy level. I believe the source is actually incorrect, and this statement need to be either revised or removed, perhaps offering a more correct explanation of the strong magnetic moment. Zane 628 (talk) 22:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I added that sentence, and the citation. I agree, it's not a very authoritative source, and it should be changed if wrong. I looked around briefly and could not find any other sources giving the number of unpaired electrons in Nd. Do you have a source for your claim of 4? --Chetvorno^TALK 23:37, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I found this source which explains exceptions to the Aufbau principle: http://ths.talawanda.org/~BrambleN/classroom/Chemistry/Notes/Section%202A/Exceptions&Shortcut.htm

Since Neodymium is not one of the elements which breaks the Aufbau principle, its electron configuration is 4f^4, 6s^2. Using the Pauli Exclusion Principle, only the four electrons in the 4f orbital would be unpaired, which does not explain the magnetic properties. Last source: I'm a chemistry major with interests in quantum mechanics. I've done quite a bit of research into this specific problem over the past few days, and I even consulted my professor about this. They agree that Neodymium has only four unpaired electrons. Zane 628 (talk) 22:17, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Neodymium magnet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402134024/http://www.journalamme.org/papers_vol20/1369S.pdf to http://www.journalamme.org/papers_vol20/1369S.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Neodymium magnet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150526052106/https://www.rareearth-magnets.net/manufacturing-process-of-sintered-neodymium-magnets.html to https://www.rareearth-magnets.net/manufacturing-process-of-sintered-neodymium-magnets.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150928182519/http://ajw.asahi.com/article/business/AJ201509280001 to http://ajw.asahi.com/article/business/AJ201509280001
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130108004337/http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5221.pdf to http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5221.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

MRI scanners with Nd

Hi, yes high strength Nd and also resistive electromagnets can indeed be used in MR scanners.

The big problem is that higher grades results in a more delicate magnet, so in order to prevent this scanners need to trade off field strength so that the oscillating gradient fields don't damage the PM. As a result, for a typical diagnostic setup N48 grade magnets are used.

In order to get a reasonable image quality and long lifetime various methods are used including shielding the magnet(s) behind "keepers" composed of a ferrous metal except when actively scanning to protect them. To get around the much lower signal strength (1/100th or less than a typical 0.9T machine) often data acquisition per slice takes longer to boost S-N ratio

Some work is being done using deep learning combined with existing referenced CT scans or other methods to examine structures in much the same way as described here however this is still in the experimental stage.

References

Overlap with Rare-earth magnet article

There seems to be a lot of partial duplication as well as gaps in coverage, when this article is compared with the Rare-earth magnet article. Sections such as on Hazards, Applications, Corrosion, and research on reduction of rare-earth usage should be consolidated into one article or the other, and cross-referenced. This article should focus on details specific to neodymium magnets, and the other article should focus on what the various rare-earth magnet types have in common. Reify-tech (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Merge in Bonded neo ?

The article bonded neo seems to have some significant overlap. Should it be merged in here? --Nanite (talk) 18:45, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Norm Koon & Badri Das

I've come across a couple sources (probably more) that mention Norman Koon and Badri Das (at US Naval Research Laboratory) as the guys who first tried this rare earth - iron - boron combination.

https://www.terramagnetica.com/2009/09/13/a-forgotten-figure-in-the-evolution-of-rare-earth-permanent-magnets/ https://www.arnoldmagnetics.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Demand-for-rare-earth-materials-in-permanent-magnets-Constantinides-COM-2012-psn-hi-res.pdf (page 18)

Interesting, maybe worth mentioning.

--Nanite (talk) 06:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I suggest merging Bonded neo into Neodymium magnet (as Nanite suggested a couple of years ago). The former doesn't seem to quite merit a stand-alone article; I think any worthwhile content from it could easily fit into the relevant section here. — Moriwen (talk) 14:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. It's not clear what the actaul distinction is between the two types, so this should be clarified in the merged article. Reify-tech (talk) 15:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please do this. I was about to nominate bonded neo at AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Support the merger --Chetvorno^TALK 11:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC)