MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146769522 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2006.887058

Pole Piece Effect on Improvement of Magnetic Controllability for Noncontact Micromanipulation

2007· article· en· W2146769522 on OpenAlexaff
Mir Behrad Khamesee, Ehsan Shameli

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetPhysicsMagnetic fieldPoint (geometry)MagnetControllabilityMagnetic levitationLevitationMagnetic dipoleDipoleField (mathematics)Topology (electrical circuits)Nuclear magnetic resonanceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringMathematicsGeometryEngineeringQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single electromagnet can be used for one-dimensional (vertical) magnetic levitation, but cannot control the distribution of the magnetic field on a horizontal plane. For three-dimensional (3-D) levitated movement of objects, an arrangement of multiple electromagnets is required. A pole piece can connect the individual poles of the electromagnets in order to eliminate the appearance of multiple poles and produce a focal point of maximum magnetic field in the horizontal plane. This paper presents the results of an investigation of the effect on different pole pieces on the regulation and control of a large gap magnetic field for 3-D micromanipulation. In a large and wide magnetic gap, a levitated object tends to stay at the maximum point of magnetic field, B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> , in order to minimize the system energy. By producing a unique B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> point and controlling its position, 3-D levitated movement of a small permanent magnet (single magnetic dipole moment) can be realized. If the B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> point is converted into an area with a uniform field that is stronger than any nearby point (B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> area), complex objects, such as microrobots affixed with several permanent magnets, can be levitated and moved. By selecting a proper pole piece and tuning the electric currents in the electromagnets, the required field distribution will be obtained. The paper proposes a number of pole pieces and discusses their effect on magnetic field distribution. Through simulation results and experimental measurements, it shows that a number of proposed pole piece profiles can generate a magnetic field for 3-D levitated motion. Finally, it reports a demonstration of 3-D levitated motion of a single magnet (using the B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> point) and a microrobot (using the B <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">max</sub> area) to show the feasibility of the proposed method for micromanipulation

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MagneticsSame topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207