4.7 Article

Realization of a Multishell Magnetically Shielded Cylinder for SERF Magnetometer Via Hybrid Design Method

Journal

IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL
Volume 23, Issue 21, Pages 25836-25843

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2023.3313585

Keywords

Finite element analysis (FEA); hybrid design method; magnetically shielded cylinder (MSC); shielding performance; spin-exchange relaxation-free (SERF) magnetometer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study introduces a modified hybrid method combining analytical solutions with finite element analysis (FEA) to improve the design efficiency and validity of a magnetically shielded cylinder (MSC) for spin-exchange relaxation-free (SERF) magnetometers. By optimizing structural parameters and testing shielding performance, the MSC achieved superior magnetic field shielding and uniformity.
Magnetically shielded cylinder (MSC) is an efficient way to construct a proper working environment for spin-exchange relaxation-free (SERF) magnetometers. In this article, we propose a modified hybrid method combining analytical solutions with finite element analysis (FEA) to improve the design efficiency and validity of an MSC. Focusing on the radial and axial shielding factors, the number of Permalloy-shell can be fast determined as 4 via analytical solutions. Then based on a carefully built FEA model in COMSOL, shielding factors together with uniformity factors extracted from magnetic distribution maps, are employed to optimize the distance of air gaps and the size and shape of access holes. The shielding performance is well tested after the realization of MSC with optimal structural parameters. It shows that the static residual field can reach as low as 0.50 and 1.39 nT in radial and axial directions, and the field uniformity are superior to 5% in most of the target region. The measurement results are well in coincidence with the simulation ones, indicating the validity of this hybrid design method.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available