Diamagnetic Water

Cool! This is the concept they utilized to build magnetic flow meter isn't it?

Would magflow applicable to oils?

right hand rule screw right?

let us say a paramagnetic fluid instead of a conductive fluid runs the conduit, how would it effect?

It depends upon how conductive the fluid is, and has nothing to do with its magnetic properties, Boss. I thought that this had already been established above, then, I'm funny that way.

so does this relates that magnets are poor conductor?

Many magnetic materials are conductors, but not all. To quote from Wikipedia:

"A ferrite is a type of ceramic compound composed of iron oxide (Fe₂O₃) combined chemically with one or more additional metallic elements. They are ferrimagnetic, meaning they can be magnetized or attracted to a magnet, and are electrically nonconductive, one of the few substances that combine these two properties."

Nice. I am an amateur to this field. If you may could you somewhat elaborate how magnetism arise in an atomic perspective?

How would you categorize, magnetic susceptible material from magnets.

Sorry, I have paying work to do. I suggest you consult Google. Or maybe Hyperphysics.

I appreciate it. Now playing Thanks!

There has been some (possibly quite a bit of) work on using nuclear magnetic resonance techniques to measure flow rates in non-conductive fluids, but other techniques such as ultrasonic flow meters are more practical and much cheaper.

The basic idea behind the NMR flowmeter is to align the magnetic spin axes of the fluid's nuclei by pulsing the fluid with a strong magnetic field and then 'listening' for the nuclei to flip back under the influence of a weaker field. I'm guessing the amplitude of the signal is proportional to the bulk and the flow rate. A complicated way of measuring flow, to be sure, especially when much simpler, reliable non-contact techniques exist.

Ultrasonic flow meters usually require (as in Doppler flow meters) some particles suspended (they can be very small) in the fluid measured, in order to maintain sufficient reflected signal. This means that is works for (1) sewage, (2) lake, river, seawater, most well-water, (3) potable water that has not been through a membrane filter. It does work worth poo on (a) RO water, (b) ultrafilter permeate, (c)ultrapure water for a wafer fab, etc.

There could actually be a niche for a good "non-contact" means of measuring flow in ultrapure water, although most mechanical impeller type meters work fine as long as they don't introduce impurities that interfere with the wafer processing.

I'm surprised they don't use differential doppler shift to measure the flow rate. Imagine a transmitter in the center with a receiver on either side. The upstream receiver would measure a lower frequency than transmitted and the downstream side a higher one, the net frequency shift proportional to twice the flow rate.

(Random thoughts - not having looked anything up):

1. Can ultrasonic flow meters (of the reflective Doppler shift type) work from outside the conduit, or must the wall be breached?
2. Could your (separated transmitter and reciever(s) technique work without breaching the wall?
3. Your suggestion would work (with less accuracy) with just a transmitter and receiver, but they would need a "reasonable" separation distance. Would that mean 2 (or preferably 3 for up- and down-stream receivers) breaches?

Sorry, ill-thought-out, but I'm tired.

Can you create free energy with this?

(splarf) Damn you made me snort my tea on the keyboard

Del

Glad to be of help!

No, I can't, but I bet some nutcase, somewhere, is trying it!

You mean here? Here on CR4? Call the gendarmes. Oh you are the gendarm!

Then get up, do something.

What you mean you cant? You cant?

What size is the nut case? M22 or M24 or is it in inch.

(Kids don't try this at home!)

Très drôle.

Gud moaning: surely you meant "vurry fanny"

I would demagnetise the magnets by heating them past their Curie point and then repeat the experiment (at the cost of my magnets, which aren't cheap). What you would see is the water close over the stack much earlier.

What is not so obvious in the pix (because the scale isn't shown) is the depth of the meniscus; it was over 5 mm (~0.2") before the water caved-in to fill the top. You never see a meniscus that high, normally.

I wonder how an electromagnet might use this? Could this effect be used to make a "no contact" pump?

Such pumps already exist, but AFAIK not via this effect.

The Russians already did this in The Hunt For Red October.

That was a pump-jet drive in Tom Clancy's book, an MHD drive in the movie^*, but neither type makes use of the diamagnetic properties of water.

You can demonstrate MHD in action in salt water (the water has to be very conductive for MHD to work) using a couple of Nd magnets, a AA cell and a plastic coin tube. Here's a video of my experiment (Chrome req'd to view):

Liquid-stator Homopolar Motor

-----

* The 'caterpillar' drive in the book made noise; a slow, periodic rush which, when sped up on tape by the sonarman, sounded definitely man-made. Tom Clancy used a pump-jet in his story because he knows better than Hollywood (and most moviegoers) that MHD drives are completely silent. It wouldn't have worked for his story - he needed a 'noisy' propulsion system for his story so that the Red October could be ID'd and tracked.

MHD might be silent, but I suspect that it would make the sub easy to find with a Magnetic Anomaly Detector.

Exactly. The field signature from an MHD-propelled sub would be extremely easy to find. Plus, MHD drives are not very efficient even when using superconducting magnets.

Except, that the principals utilized in that type of propulsion are to create eddy currents in the VERY electrically conductive salty sea water, from which the craft then uses electromagnetic fields to propel itself away. The VERY weak diamagnetic properties had to be overcome, in order to for this system to 'do its stuff'.

I noticed the center does not show water level until over top. Is this due to physical sealing between magnets or magnetic effect?

Both.

Does this effect influence low tide and high tide?

Tides are a gravitational phenomenon, not magnetic, 'dia' or otherwise.

I should mention that diamagnetic materials respond to a magnetic field's gradient as well as its strength. This is why the water is not repelled at the stack's periphery, but only at the poles. Along the stack's sides the gradient is radial and fairly weak; whereas at the poles the gradient and the flux density are greatest.

Would ferromagnetic particles in suspension behave as iron filings do with a bar magnet?

Ferrofluids are awesome. Use them with a strong electromagnet driven by a power oscillator or, better, a music source and the blob dances to the beat.

Take a trip without leavin' the farm.

They can also make a rotating UH vacuum seal.

They certainly do! You've gotta be a little picky, though - especially for UHV apps - because some of these ferrofluids use a 'fluid' containing volatiles that outgas enough to cause problems.

Mind keeping this crap off my thread or mark it Off-Topic to spare everyone else the trouble?

The force would be proportional to the gradient of the field and the amount of potential energy would be proportional to its strength. This force is opposed by the gravitational force proportional to the depth of the depression. So the depth of the depression should be proportional to the magnetic gradient at the water's surface for forces to balance.

Yes.

Can these diamagnetic properties be applied to the transmission of RF signals in water? What is the reluctance for water at RF?

I'm not sure what you mean ... you either transmit RF in water or you don't.

For example, a magnetic tape needs bias to overcome resistance to a change (reluctance) in polarity for video or audio signals.

Can RF be transmitted through/with water?

I apologize for inane questions, my goal was to stay on topic.

Water is notoriously opaque to RF, depending on how conductive it is due to dissolved salts, minerals, etc. Fresh water is more transparent to RF than seawater by far but still quite opaque. Both fresh water and seawater become somewhat more transparent to RF at extremely low frequencies (ELF) and is why land-based sub transmitters use such low frequencies. The U.S. transmitted* on 76 Hz and 45 Hz whilst the Ruskies transmit on 82 Hz and lower. Submarines themselves don't transmit on these frequencies but receive only, due to the enormous size of the transmitting antennae required.

-----

* Past tense. The U.S. decommissioned its Clam Lake, WI transmitter some years ago whilst Russia's is still in operation.

The - ε - of water is 80, compared to 1 for air.

Way back in the 70's one of my jobs was testing the dielectric constant of plastics and adhesives that were just coming on the market.

The set-up I used looked much like you would imagine it did. Very primitive by today's standards.

Ultrapure, deionised water makes a great dielectric for energy-storage capacitors, btw. Keeping it from etching submerged metal parts is a problem, though. Water does not like to stay deionised for very long.

It would have negligible effect. Diamagnetism is very weak and can only have visible effects in strong fields.

I'll join the "cool post" chorus.

One of my dreams is to devise a magic process to rid seawater of plastic. (Being a software specialist implies a "bit" of a learning curve.) Much of the plastic in the oceans is microscopic due to long-term degradation. Could this principle be employed to remove such tiny (or large) particles of plastic? Maybe flowing seawater over a large bed of magnets could induce a concentration of not-water in the flow.

I suspect that there's too much "good stuff" in seawater that is also subject to the effect, and that various types of plastic are too variably subject to it, to be truly effective. Perhaps as part of a multi-stage process...?

Since plastics are typically less dense than seawater, they tend to float at or near the surface. Seems to me they could round up these bits by towing some sort of floating line between two or more ships. I suppose that'll have to wait until the world's oceans are plastered over in waste plastic before anyone will bother with cleanup. You know, if it doesn't make someone rich what good is it?

I think it's got to the stage where a lot of the plastic crap has been battered one way or another into sufficiently small particles that the agitation of the surface water keeps them mostly below surface, in suspension.

Where's Netmaker when you need 'im?

there is money in everything, just not necessarily profit. It requires some profit for a company to keep trying the same thing the same way over and over. Otherwise, they call it insanity. Others call it busyness.

rinse and repeat now with a paramagnetic fluid...what did you observe?

I read through all of the posts. Did someone say what this phenomena was used for ( practical applications) or what device currently or had been manufactured ? Is the demonstration consistent when magnets of different sizes and field strengths are used ? What is the name of the related Theory and math formula for the action ? Before anyone will bother with a cleanup couldn't be related to miscellaneous junk spinning in orbit, could it. Thanks for the insight, I like an education.

Some materials are diamagnetic; most of these only weakly so. Water is one of them. Its diamagnetic properties go largely unnoticed until you subject it to powerful magnetic fields.

You've probably seen pictures of a frog or mouse suspended in a magnetic field? That's diamagnetism at work.

As Arty Johnson used to say: Very interesting! But, of what practical use is this knowledge?

You don't say, but even if you started with distilled water, it ceased to be once you added the coloring. I would like to see this experiment repeated using water as pure as you can get it, juxtaposed against your uncolored tap water. It might take a bit of lighting manipulation; but, I think it would be possible to get good pictures without the coloring.

IMHO You miss the point of this elegant demonstration of a weak force phenomena. Without the use of a high resolution strain gauge, long lever arm torsion bars, or a collection of other more complicated measurement techniques, a series of simple still frame images show a phenomena that is very easy to overlook.

You want to see this performed with hard to image pure distilled water to prove beyond the shadow of your doubt that this is a real phenomena. If you want to try to repeat this demonstration to meet your own capricious desires of water purity, atmospheric pressure and any other ephemeral desire, then get off your (*&^%!#@~ @$$ and present your own images and an explanation of your test results.

Another idea would be to perform a Google search verification if water was diamagnetic.

I don't view my request as anything other than a desire to see you exercise a thorough demonstration of the scientific principal of having standards against which, to measure. Without the control groups you have proved nothing of scientific value. Yes you have demonstrated a phenomenon, but you can't say with certainty exactly what.

Capricious? I think not!

Did adding anything to the water alter that phenomenon one way, or the other?

Until you can answer that question, you haven't completed the experiment.

I added food colouring after performing the experiment with distilled, de-ionised water which proved much harder to photograph clearly. No difference.

As scientific rigour demands independent verification, have at it.

Your opening sentence was a slap in the face and it went downhill from there. If you want to see if it works with water pure as the driven snow, do your own bluddy experiment.

"I don't view my request as anything other than a desire to see you exercise a thorough demonstration of the scientific principal of having standards against which, to measure."

Why should anyone have to demonstrate anything to you, asshole? Who died and left you in charge?

I cordially invite you to take that arrogance of yours and shove it where the sun don't shine, then come back when you have less time.

WOW! What a reaction, to a simple statement. I wouldn't doubt, that you have violated a few of the rules of this forum.

I demanded nothing, I suggested something, and responded benignly to a comment about my suggestion. The only reason I suggested anything in the first place is because, I THOUGHT, that was a place for the exchange of thought. I THOUGHT the guy was demonstrating his own work, and was doing so for a purpose. I was wrong on that point, but that was an easy mistake to make, as no information to the contrary was made.

Are my words true, or aren't they? If they are, then you can take a fly leap!

"I THOUGHT, that was a place for the exchange of thought. I THOUGHT ... Are my words true, or aren't they?" Only you can answer that.

Thou protesteth overmuch.

"First energy from an oscillating magnetic field is temporarily applied to the patient at the appropriate resonant frequency. The excited hydrogen atoms emit a radio frequency signal which is measured by a receiver coil. The radio signal can be made to encode position information by varying the main magnetic field using gradient coils. As these coils are rapidly switched on and off they create the characteristic repetitive noises of an MRI scan. The contrast between different tissues is determined by the rate at which excited atoms return to the equilibrium state."

From Wikipedia How MRI Works.

MRI depends on a different property of matter (nuclear spin) than diamagnetism???

europium mkII,

Thanks for the enlightenment, which only serves to increase my curiosity.