1993
DOI: 10.1063/1.1144306
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Image and sample geometry effects in SQUID magnetometers

Abstract: Articles you may be interested inErratum: ''Effect of sample and magnetometer dimensions on the flux detected by a SQUID magnetometer' ' [Rev. Sci. Instrum. 5 4, 1380] Rev. Sci. Instrum. 55, 818 (1984); 10.1063/1.1137973 Effect of sample and magnetometer dimensions on the flux detected by a SQUID magnetometer Rev. Sci. Instrum. 54, 1380 (1983); 10.1063/1.1137249 Superconducting magnet image effects observed with a vibrating sample magnetometer Rev. Sci. Instrum. 54, 137 (1983);This review concerns the interpre… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
0
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The sensor response function of an SRM is primarily determined by the geometry of the sensing coils, while “image effects” produced by the superconducting shield (used to maximize the sensitivity and minimize the noise of the SQUID system) may complicate the actual response [e.g., Zięba , ]. Shibuya and Michikawa [] performed theoretical calculations of sensor response for the first generation SRM onboard R/V JOIDES Resolution with superconducting shield, and obtained results comparable to the empirical measurement along z axis [ Oda and Shibuya , ].…”
Section: Response Function Determinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sensor response function of an SRM is primarily determined by the geometry of the sensing coils, while “image effects” produced by the superconducting shield (used to maximize the sensitivity and minimize the noise of the SQUID system) may complicate the actual response [e.g., Zięba , ]. Shibuya and Michikawa [] performed theoretical calculations of sensor response for the first generation SRM onboard R/V JOIDES Resolution with superconducting shield, and obtained results comparable to the empirical measurement along z axis [ Oda and Shibuya , ].…”
Section: Response Function Determinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This geometry is intermediate between the “high homogeneity” arrangement (Δ = 40 mm, L ∼ 100 mm) optimized for discrete‐sample measurements and the “high‐resolution” geometry (Δ = 10 mm, L ∼ 40 mm) designed for maximum resolution of downcore variations. Although the coil geometry is accurately known, calculation of the instrument response function from first principles is strongly complicated by “image effects” related to the superconducting shield [ Zięba , 1993; Shibuya and Michikawa , 2000; Parker and Gee , 2002]. Our magnetometer uses pulse‐tube cryocooling rather than a liquid helium reservoir.…”
Section: Response Function Determination and Noise Characterizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…x v , value of À(9.81 6 0.02) Â 10 À6 . The experimental uncertainties of the susceptibility values are dominated by the variation observed in the value of k. The differences in the value for k for water and polyethylene may be attributed to subtle variations of the geometric shape of samples (18)(19)(20), which had cylindrical and rectangular shapes, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%