Talk:Superconducting magnet

message: Does anybody have references for this? Maybe mention the 1941 discovery of niobium nitride, the 1953 discovery of superconducting vanadium, the or the Westinghouse developments?
====Use section====
This used to read:
"Superconducting magnets can reach a much higher magnetic field intensity than normal magnets and they can hold this field for a long time. This is particularly needed in particle accelerators and nuclear magnetic resonance. For economic reasons these magnets are also used when a field of more than 1 tesla must be maintained for a long time."
which is all a bit wrong. I rewrote it and added the stuff on quenching. It might need a tidy up, I'm a bit tired, and - um - my magnet just quenched, which is why I've got time to do this. - 147.173.84.232 19:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nick, much better opening paragraph, but I have one clarification. The largest resistive magnets are still capable of higher field than SC ones. NHMFL can do 36 T, DC in the hybrid. - Acronymsical (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This used to read:
"Superconducting magnets can reach a much higher magnetic field intensity than normal magnets and they can hold this field for a long time. This is particularly needed in particle accelerators and nuclear magnetic resonance. For economic reasons these magnets are also used when a field of more than 1 tesla must be maintained for a long time."
which is all a bit wrong. I rewrote it and added the stuff on quenching. It might need a tidy up, I'm a bit tired, and - um - my magnet just quenched, which is why I've got time to do this. - 147.173.84.232 19:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nick, much better opening paragraph, but I have one clarification. The largest resistive magnets are still capable of higher field than SC ones. NHMFL can do 36 T, DC in the hybrid. - Acronymsical (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Use section

message: They come as ordenary looking magnets as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1yzH_7NIMg
They are verry cool, but ommited from this article
Alan2here 21:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  They come in non-electro too 

message: * The coil itself may be made of tiny filaments (about 20 micrometers thick) of a type II superconductor in a copper matrix. It is not the coil but the wire a superconducting magnet is wound from that consists of filaments embedded in a copper matrix.
* These filaments need to be this small because in this type of superconductor the current only flows skin-deep. This is not correct
TomyDuby (talk) 10:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies in the construction section 

message: The diagram of the superconducting magnet is not correct. The center of field is not in the center of the lower large superconducting coil. This is caused by the field of the compensation coil right above. The center is shifted downwards. Spinliquid (talk) 10:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram misleading 

message: Substituted at 07:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment - March 2007 

message: Fermilab achieves world-record field strength for accelerator magnet Using Nb-Sn, claims 14.1 Tesla - previous record was 13.8 T. - Could mention and explain why accelerator magnets are harder than the other magnets mentioned - maybe its the extent of the field, or its uniformity along the beam track ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:20, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  advances in accelerator magnets 

message: Taming the superconductors of tomorrow includes latest on SbSn3 coils, & prospects for HTS. Could be good source for History and/or Uses sections. - Rod57 (talk) 11:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of the art eg for particle accelerators