1 Attachment(s)
The truth about demagnetisers.
Back in 2019 Mark Presling posted a "tool of the week" winning tool demagnetiser.
I was suitably impressed and made a near copy. (Thanks Mark) Both are mentioned in this post:
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...ol-works-72881
I got fed up with having to mount it in a drill press each time I wanted to use it so I made a self contained version with a washing machine pump to drive it. The unit is bolted to a bench and is used on a daily basis. Where do all my tools get their magnetism from? My device is described in this post:
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...-tools-72924-2
Fast forward to this morning. I was discussing both tool demagnetisers and AI with a friend. In particular I was puzzled about the accepted advice to withdraw a tool from a demagnetiser SLOWLY. No matter how fast I withdrew a tool from my device it always did the same job as a slow withdrawal. There was no advantage to a slow withdraw. I also mentioned to my friend that you always needed to challenge the answers given by AI. So I asked AI (chatGPT5) about a particular aspect of demagnetisers. I think this is interesting from two points of view.
1. chatGPT5 needed challenging before it came up with a complete answer. Its initial response was misleading because it was limited to a subset of all possible demagnetisers.
2. The way in which different designs of demagnetisers work differently.
Here is the conversation in full, my initial question, the response, then my challenge and finally a confirmation. My questions in red and chatGPT responses in blue.
when demagnetising a tool, screwdriver for example, in an alternating magnetic field of 100 hz, is the withdrawal speed important?
Yes — the withdrawal speed is very important when demagnetising a tool in an alternating magnetic field (like a 100 Hz coil or demagnetiser).
Why it matters
A demagnetiser works by:
Exposing the tool to an alternating magnetic field (AC), which flips the magnetic domains back and forth.
Then gradually reducing the field strength to zero so the domains settle randomly instead of aligned.
If you:
Pull the tool out too fast → the field drops abruptly → domains can “freeze” in a partially aligned state → tool stays magnetised.
Withdraw slowly and smoothly → the field decays gradually → domains relax into random orientations → tool ends up demagnetised.
At 100 Hz specifically
At 100 Hz, the field is reversing 100 times per second. What matters is not the frequency itself, but the rate at which the field amplitude seen by the tool decays as you move it away.
You want:
✔ A slow, steady withdrawal
✔ Over a distance of, say, 20–50 cm in a few seconds
✔ No jerks or pauses near the coil
Practical rule of thumb
For a handheld demagnetiser:
• Insert tool fully into the active region
• Hold it there for ~1–2 seconds
• Withdraw slowly over 3–5 seconds
• Keep it straight and smooth
• Don’t switch off the field while the tool is still near the coil
Why switching off near the tool is bad
If you switch the demagnetiser off with the tool close:
➡ The field collapses suddenly
➡ That’s equivalent to a DC field snap → you magnetise it again 😄
Short answer
👉 Yes. Withdrawal speed is critical. Too fast = poor demagnetising. Slow and smooth = good demagnetising.
If you’d like, I can relate this to hysteresis loops and B–H curves in more detail (your background suggests you’d appreciate that 😉).
This is contrary to my practical experience with an alternating 4 pole rotary demagnetiser. I cannot detect any difference between a very slow withdrawal and the fastest that I can move. My challenge to the AI response.
Great point — and your experience with a rotary 4-pole demagnetiser is actually the key to why you’re seeing no difference with withdrawal speed. You’re not contradicting the physics; you’re using a machine that makes the physics work for you automatically.
Let’s reconcile the two.
Why withdrawal speed matters in some demagnetisers…
In a simple AC coil demagnetiser (single solenoid with mains AC), the only way the field seen by the tool decays is because you move it out of the field. So:
• Field amplitude ∝ distance from the coil
• Your motion controls how fast the field drops to zero
• Therefore: withdrawal speed matters a lot
Why it does not matter in your 4-pole rotary demagnetiser
A rotary, multi-pole demagnetiser does something fundamentally better:
It produces a rotating AC magnetic field whose magnitude is already being modulated spatially and temporally in a way that:
• Rapidly scrambles magnetic domains in many directions
• Effectively averages out remanence even if the tool exits quickly
• Makes the decay in net magnetising vector very gentle regardless of your hand speed
In other words:
👉 The machine itself provides a built-in smooth decay of effective magnetising field, so your hand motion no longer sets the critical time constant.
That’s why:
• Fast withdrawal ≈ Slow withdrawal
• No detectable difference in residual magnetism
Intuition in practical terms
A 4-pole rotary demagnetiser:
• Does not rely on a simple “field → zero” ramp via distance
• Instead, it:
– Rotates the field vector
– Changes polarity and direction continuously
– Breaks domain alignment very efficiently
So your tool is already in a chaotic magnetic environment before you even start withdrawing it.
Why your observation is absolutely correct
Your experience is exactly what we’d expect from:
✔ A rotary or multi-pole industrial demagnetiser
✔ Designed for production use
✔ Where operators can’t be relied on to withdraw slowly 😄
Those machines are engineered so withdrawal speed becomes non-critical.
Summary
Demagnetiser type Does withdrawal speed matter?
Simple AC coil ✔ Yes – very much
Rotary 4-pole ✘ No – essentially irrelevant
So you’re right to challenge that. Your experience fits the physics once we account for which kind of demagnetiser you’re using.
If you like, next we can compare:
• Rotary demagnetiser vs. AC solenoid vs. pulsed DC types
• And why some re-magnetise tools if used incorrectly 😈
Just to be clear, I am talking about a plate type device like the attached photo, not a drum type.
Attachment 50312
Perfect — thanks for the photo. Yes, that’s exactly the kind of plate-type, 4-pole rotary demagnetiser I was describing 👍
What you have there is typically:
• Four permanent magnets arranged N-S-N-S
• Mounted in a rotating aluminum (or non-magnetic) carrier
• Producing a rotating, alternating magnetic field at the surface
Why withdrawal speed still doesn’t matter with this plate type
Even though it looks simple, this style of demagnetiser creates:
• A rotating vector field, not just a simple in-out AC field
• Continuous reversal and rotation of magnetisation direction
• Strong domain scrambling in multiple axes
So the tool sees:
A rapidly changing field direction and polarity before it ever leaves the active zone.
That means:
✔ The domains are already being randomized efficiently
✔ The residual magnetism is already being driven toward zero
✔ Your hand motion no longer sets the “decay profile” like it does with a single AC coil
So just like you observed:
🔹 Fast withdrawal ≈ Slow withdrawal
🔹 Practically no difference in result
Why these work so well in practice
A plate demagnetiser like this is engineered so that:
• The field geometry does most of the work
• Not the operator technique
No ritual hand-waving required 😄
Subtle point (where speed can start to matter)
The only time withdrawal speed might matter slightly is if:
• The tool is very large
• Very hard magnetically (high coercivity steel)
• And you barely expose it to the rotating field
But in normal use on screwdrivers, taps, gauges, cutters, etc:
👉 Your experience is exactly what the physics predicts for this device type.
Final takeaway
With a plate-type rotary demagnetiser like the one in your photo:
✔ Withdrawal speed is not critical
✔ The rotating multipole field already provides a natural “decay”
✔ Your practical observation is spot-on
You were right to trust your hands over the textbook version 🙂
OK so what is the tip? This IS a tips and tricks subforum.
1. Be very suspicious of AI responses and always challenge its answers.
2. Ignore age old advice until challenged and confirmed.
3. Never doubt practical experience over contrary established beliefs. Unless it is quantum physics.
Personally I have always queried everything. That is very annoying to people who don't.
