34 grade is best read as a high-energy Sm2Co17 value set
The clearest public 2:17-34 reference lists typical BHmax 34 MGOe, minimum BHmax 32 MGOe, typical Br 11.9 kG, and minimum iHc 18 kOe.
[R1] Reviewed 2026-06-07
Interpret the magnetic characteristics first: BHmax, Br, Hcj, temperature class, reverse-field margin, and geometry risk. Then use the report layer to decide whether a supplier value set is a credible 34 grade Sm2Co17 candidate or just a loose label.
Enter the quoted magnetic characteristics and duty conditions to see whether a supplier sheet behaves like a public 34 grade Sm2Co17 candidate, where confidence breaks down, and what evidence to ask for next.
These are decision statements, not glossary entries. Each one points to the evidence used later in the page.
The clearest public 2:17-34 reference lists typical BHmax 34 MGOe, minimum BHmax 32 MGOe, typical Br 11.9 kG, and minimum iHc 18 kOe.
[R1] Reviewed 2026-06-07
A 34 MGOe class can reduce magnet volume in compact circuits, but pull force and field output still depend on geometry, air gap, magnetization direction, and load line.
[R1][P1] Reviewed 2026-06-07
A dedicated 34 grade EEC sheet lists 300 C, while a broader EEC SmCo table lists 250 C for EEC 2:17-34. Treat this as a quote-date confirmation item, not a universal ceiling.
[R1][R2] Reviewed 2026-06-07
Nearby public grades include RECOMA 33E, RECOMA 35E, Goudsmit S32, and 32 MGOe class Sm2Co17. Accept substitution only after comparing BHmax, Br, Hcb, Hcj, coefficient, and curves.
[R4][R5][P2] Reviewed 2026-06-07
Room-temperature table values are useful for screening, but production qualification needs demagnetization curves at the intended operating temperature and magnet geometry.
[R1][R4][R9] Reviewed 2026-06-07
SmCo can reduce some high-temperature NdFeB tradeoffs, yet cobalt is on the DOE 2023 critical materials list and cobalt plus samarium appear on the USGS critical minerals list used in Federal Register notices.
[R7][R8] Reviewed 2026-06-07
The page uses public data as a screen. Any production decision still needs current supplier documentation for the exact grade, shape, magnetization direction, coating, and lot.
| Characteristic | Public 34 grade value | Decision meaning | Common misread | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum energy product BHmax | 34 MGOe typical; 32 MGOe minimum | Primary high-energy class signal for compact magnetic circuits. | Treating BHmax as pull force without geometry, air gap, and load-line modeling. | [R1] |
| Residual induction Br | 11.9 kG typical; 11.7 kG minimum | Starting flux-density value for circuit modeling and supplier comparison. | Comparing suppliers by grade label while ignoring Br minimum versus typical values. | [R1] |
| Normal coercivity Hc / Hcb | 11.1 kOe typical; 10.8 kOe minimum | Useful room-temperature screen for demagnetization resistance. | Using Hc alone for reverse-field approval instead of checking Hcj and curves. | [R1] |
| Intrinsic coercivity Hcj / iHc | 18 kOe minimum | Key public guardrail for irreversible demagnetization resistance. | Ignoring reverse-field exposure, operating point, and temperature-specific curves. | [R1] |
| Reversible Br temperature coefficient | About -0.035%/C on the 34 grade sheet; -0.040%/C in EEC technical and general SmCo tables | Screening estimate for reversible flux drift with temperature. | Extrapolating one coefficient across all temperatures, shapes, suppliers, and documents. | [R1][R2][R3] |
| Maximum operating temperature | 300 C in a dedicated 34 grade sheet; 250 C in one general EEC SmCo table | Thermal class screen for hot-zone material selection. | Assuming every supplier sheet, shape, and load line uses the same continuous-temperature ceiling. | [R1][R2] |
The enhancement pass focused on places where a thin page would overstate certainty: supplier equivalence, temperature margins, standards, and compliance.
SERP answers collapse characteristics into one strength claim
This page separates BHmax, Br, Hc, Hcj, temperature coefficient, maximum operating temperature, and geometry constraints.
Impact: A buyer can identify which characteristic actually needs supplier proof rather than asking for a vague "strong magnet".
[R1][R9]
Application pages do not resolve grade equivalence
The characteristics angle compares public 34 grade values against nearby 32, 33E, 35E, SmCo5, and high-temperature NdFeB routes.
Impact: The user can avoid duplicate RFQs and request a property-by-property equivalence table.
[R4][R5][P2]
Temperature limits are often overstated
The tool treats operating temperature, maximum stated temperature, and thermal headroom as separate values, and the report now flags the public 250 C versus 300 C document conflict.
Impact: A narrow thermal margin triggers curve and sample-validation actions instead of false confidence.
[R1][R2][R3][P1]
Standards context is usually missing from supplier tables
ASTM A1102 identifies sintered SmCo families, while ASTM A977/A977M is the curve characterization method referenced by ASTM A1102.
Impact: Audited RFQs can ask for a test-method expectation rather than relying on catalog screenshots.
[R9]
Compliance risk is hidden in material selection
The report flags DOE/USGS critical-material context and the DFARS 252.225-7052 date change from production-stage restrictions through 2026-12-31 to broader SmCo supply-chain coverage from 2027-01-01.
Impact: Programs can start origin and documentation review before magnetic samples consume schedule.
[R7][R8][R10]
This evidence pass separates usable public facts from quote-date confirmation items. Where public evidence is inconsistent or missing, the page marks the decision as conditional instead of forcing a stronger conclusion.
| Decision question | Evidence status | Usable fact | Boundary / action | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Is 34 grade clearly a Sm2Co17 high-energy grade? | Public evidence supports it | EEC labels 2:17-34 as sintered Sm2Co17 and lists BHmax 34 MGOe typical / 32 MGOe minimum. | This supports EEC 2:17-34 and nearby value-set screening. It does not prove every supplier label called "34 grade" is equivalent. | [R1][R3] |
| Is 300 C the correct continuous-use limit? | Conflicting public data | A dedicated EEC 34 grade sheet and EEC technical brief list 300 C, while one broader EEC SmCo sheet lists 250 C for EEC 2:17-34. | Treat maximum operating temperature as quote-date confirmation for each supplier. Ask for the current datasheet revision, load-line assumptions, and irreversible-loss evidence. | [R1][R2][R3] |
| Can ASTM A1102 replace supplier curves? | No | ASTM A1102 covers sintered SmCo families and points to ASTM A977/A977M for specific demagnetization-curve characterization. | The ASTM public page gives scope and method references, not free grade-by-grade production acceptance curves. | [R9] |
| Does DFARS compliance mean the same thing before and after 2027? | No | DFARS 252.225-7052 applies a melting/production scope through 2026-12-31 and expands SmCo magnet coverage to the entire supply chain from 2027-01-01. | Only covered U.S. defense contracts are directly affected; confirm clause flowdown and exceptions with procurement counsel. | [R10] |
| Are public prices, MOQ, and lead times reliable? | No reliable public benchmark found | No source found in this pass gives a stable public 34 grade price, MOQ, or lead-time benchmark that is reliable enough for this page. | Use RFQ evidence rather than a fabricated market range; quote date, origin, shape, tolerance, and certification burden dominate. | [U1] |
The method keeps the tool and report aligned: start with public characteristics, add operating constraints, then demand evidence where the decision can fail.
1. Anchor the public value set
Start with BHmax, Br, Hcb, Hcj, temperature coefficient, and maximum operating temperature rather than the grade name alone.
[R1]
2. Separate typical and minimum values
Typical values describe a catalog signal; minimum values define a better RFQ guardrail.
[R1][P2]
3. Add operating conditions
Map continuous temperature, peak temperature, dwell, reverse field, and geometry against the public table.
[R1][P1]
4. Request curve evidence
Use ASTM A977/A977M or equivalent demagnetization-curve evidence when qualification requires auditable data.
[R9]
5. Compare alternatives before lock
Check 32 MGOe Sm2Co17, SmCo5, 35E-equivalent SmCo, and high-temperature NdFeB against the same conditions.
[R4][R5][P2]
| Condition | Interpretation | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| BHmax 32-35 MGOe and Br near 11.7-12.0 kG | Likely high-energy Sm2Co17 screening band, assuming the supplier states comparable test conditions. | Ask whether values are typical or minimum, then request curve data. |
| BHmax below 32 MGOe or Br below 11.7 kG | Not a clean public 34 grade match, even if the quote uses the label. | Ask for grade family, substitution reason, and a lower-grade comparison. |
| Hcj below 18 kOe or reverse-field margin below 4 kOe | Demagnetization confidence is weak for motors, actuators, and loaded magnetic circuits. | Require load-line model and demagnetization curves at operating temperature. |
| Operating temperature within 35 C of stated maximum | Thermal screening is too close for catalog approval. | Validate irreversible loss under dwell time, peak temperature, and thermal-cycle assumptions. |
| Thinnest section below 2 mm | Geometry can dominate yield and reliability risk because sintered SmCo is brittle. | Add chamfer, handling, fixture, and inspection requirements before sample order. |
The goal is not to always pick 34 grade. The goal is to know when the characteristics justify the extra evidence, cost, and qualification work.
| Option | Characteristic signal | Tradeoff | Best use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34 grade Sm2Co17 | 34 MGOe typical, 18 kOe iHc minimum, 300 C class public reference. | High package-density potential but stronger curve, supplier-equivalence, and geometry evidence requirements. | Compact hot-zone circuits where material cost is secondary to package and qualification margin. |
| 32 MGOe-class Sm2Co17 | Slightly lower energy class with broader public availability across supplier systems. | May need more volume but can simplify quote comparison and sourcing. | Designs that need Sm2Co17 stability but have enough envelope for a modestly larger magnet. |
| 35E-equivalent high-energy SmCo | Arnold RECOMA 35E public table lists 33.3 MGOe, 11.9 kG Br, 23 kOe Hcj, and 300 C maximum operating temperature. | Can improve package density but may raise MOQ, lead-time, and substitution complexity. | High-value designs where a supplier can document curves and lot control. |
| SmCo5 | Lower energy product family with useful thermal and corrosion positioning. | Lower output per volume but may be easier for some shapes or lower-energy circuits. | Hot or corrosive environments without aggressive package-density demand. |
| High-temperature NdFeB | Strong room-temperature output, lower initial material cost in many programs. | Heat, corrosion, coating, and heavy-rare-earth dependencies can erode the advantage. | Moderate-temperature applications where cost and room-temperature flux dominate. |
These are the failure modes that turn a correct-looking catalog value into a bad material decision.
Trigger: The RFQ says "34 grade SmCo" but does not specify value windows or test method.
Impact: Supplier quotes become non-comparable and substitution risk remains hidden.
Mitigation: Ask for BHmax, Br, Hcb, Hcj, coefficient, maximum operating temperature, and curves in one table.
Trigger: The 300 C reference is treated as continuous approval for the exact assembly.
Impact: Irreversible loss or field drift can appear late in qualification.
Mitigation: Separate continuous temperature, peak dwell, cycle count, and load-line assumptions.
Trigger: Motor or actuator designers use room-temperature BHmax and ignore Hcj margin.
Impact: Demagnetization can occur even when the grade looks strong on paper.
Mitigation: Compare reverse-field exposure with temperature-specific demagnetization curves.
Trigger: Thin sections, arcs, sharp corners, or press-fit assembly are reviewed after material lock.
Impact: Chipping, cracks, poor yield, and inconsistent magnetic output.
Mitigation: Include thinnest section, edge requirements, handling fixture, and inspection gates in the RFQ.
Trigger: Critical-material, country-of-origin, or defense restrictions are checked after sampling.
Impact: A technically valid magnet may still fail program procurement rules.
Mitigation: Ask for origin and documentation capability before sample purchase for regulated programs.
Trigger: 34 grade is selected for a moderate-duty circuit because it sounds stronger.
Impact: The project pays for unnecessary material, machining, and validation complexity.
Mitigation: Compare 32 MGOe Sm2Co17, SmCo5, and high-temperature NdFeB before RFQ lock.
Assumptions: Quote lists 33.5 MGOe BHmax, 11.8 kG Br, 18 kOe Hcj, and 300 C maximum temperature.
Process: Run the tool with those values, then ask whether they are minimum or typical and request the demag curve package.
Outcome: Likely 34 grade candidate, but not approved until curve and geometry evidence match the drawing.
Assumptions: 220 C continuous, 270 C peak, reverse-field exposure around 7 kOe, tight package envelope.
Process: Use the tool to expose thermal and reverse-field margin, then compare 34 grade with 35E-equivalent SmCo.
Outcome: 34 grade may be defensible if the supplier proves irreversible-loss control at the operating point.
Assumptions: Good catalog values but a 1.1 mm thinnest section and press-fit assembly plan.
Process: Treat geometry as a high-risk characteristic even if BHmax and Br match.
Outcome: Material selection must be reviewed with chamfer, fixture, coating, and inspection strategy.
Assumptions: 90 C continuous, low reverse-field load, broad envelope, cost-sensitive procurement.
Process: The tool should show limited need for 34 grade; compare lower-grade SmCo and high-temperature NdFeB.
Outcome: 34 grade is probably not the first commercial choice unless compliance or package constraints change.
Send the tool output with these fields so suppliers quote a value set, not only a name.
Source-backed values are marked with public references. Items marked as practice guidance should be checked against the final drawing, supplier process, and quote date.
| ID | Source | Date | Coverage | Certainty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | Electron Energy Corporation 34 Grade SmCo Sell Sheet | PDF accessed 2026-06-07 | Public 2:17-34 properties: BHmax, Br, Hc, iHc, Br temperature coefficient, maximum operating temperature note, and applications. | Known public source |
| R2 | Electron Energy Corporation SmCo general sell sheet | PDF accessed 2026-06-07 | General EEC SmCo table showing EEC 2:17-34 values with -0.040%/C Br coefficient and 250 C maximum operating temperature, creating a public-document conflict with the dedicated 34 grade sheet. | Known public source; confirm current revision before RFQ lock |
| R3 | Electron Energy Corporation SmCo technical brief | PDF accessed 2026-06-07 | EEC 2:17-34 comparison against 2:17-33 and 2:17-31; lists 34 MGOe typical, 32 MGOe minimum, -0.040%/C Br coefficient, and 300 C maximum operating temperature. | Supplier technical source; values remain catalog screening data |
| R4 | Arnold Magnetic Technologies RECOMA SmCo grade data | Accessed 2026-06-07 | Nearby high-energy RECOMA grades; public table includes 33E and 35E values and supplier-specific naming differences. | Supplier data; verify current quote |
| R5 | Goudsmit SmCo magnet grades overview | Accessed 2026-06-07 | Common SmCo grade ranges and instruction to contact supplier for other grades. | Supplier overview; not a universal grade table |
| R7 | U.S. DOE 2023 Critical Materials Assessment | Accessed 2026-06-07 | DOE critical materials list context; cobalt is listed for energy-material supply risk while samarium is better supported through the USGS critical minerals list. | Government source; procurement impact varies by program |
| R8 | Federal Register 2025 Final List of Critical Minerals | Published 2025-11-07; accessed 2026-06-07 | USGS final list includes cobalt and samarium among 60 critical minerals, updating the 2022 list. | Government notice; check whether newer critical-minerals lists apply to a specific program |
| R10 | DFARS 252.225-7052 restriction context for samarium-cobalt magnets | Accessed 2026-06-07 | Covered defense-contract restrictions for SmCo magnets, including scope through 2026-12-31 and expanded supply-chain coverage effective 2027-01-01. | Legal/procurement source; confirm with counsel for contracts |
| R9 | ASTM A1102-19 and ASTM A977/A977M references | Accessed 2026-06-07 | Sintered SmCo material-family context and demagnetization-curve test-method reference. | Standards source; full text may require purchase |
| U1 | Public research gap | Reviewed 2026-06-07 | No reliable public data found for stable 34 grade SmCo price, MOQ, lead time, or universal supplier equivalence. | Known unknown; resolve by RFQ and supplier documentation |
| P1 | SmCoSupply engineering synthesis | Reviewed 2026-06-07 | Geometry, chipping, coating, and qualification implications inferred from SmCo manufacturing practice and internal buyer guidance. | Practice-based guidance; confirm against final drawing |
| P2 | SmCoSupply grade-selection guidance | Reviewed 2026-06-07 | Supplier-equivalence, RFQ, and fallback grade workflow. | Internal guidance grounded in public supplier tables |
Risk disclosure: this page is a technical screening aid for procurement and engineering conversations. It does not replace supplier-certified data, magnetic simulation, safety review, contract compliance review, or destructive qualification testing.
Inquiry Email