The word is a contraction of magnetic pixel, and the analogy holds better than most. A screen pixel is one addressable dot of colour; a maxel is one addressable patch of polarity. A photograph is not a brighter dot — it is many dots arranged. A coded magnet is not a stronger magnet, it is many poles arranged.
Resolution is a trade, not a quality setting
More maxels across the same face means each one is smaller. That buys a more precise behaviour and an even shorter reach. Fewer, larger maxels give more raw holding force and a coarser response.
| Choice | What you gain | What you give up |
|---|---|---|
| Many small maxels | Precise alignment, sharp detents, very short field | Peak holding force |
| Few large maxels | Higher holding force, easier to manufacture | Coarser behaviour, longer reach |
Neither is better. The right answer comes from the job: a latch on a cover wants force, an optical mount wants precision.
Material and pattern are separate decisions
The material — neodymium, samarium cobalt, ferrite, alnico — sets how strong the magnet can be and how hot it can get before it starts losing strength permanently. The maxel pattern sets what it does. You choose both, and one does not constrain the other much.
Next
The patterns, and the behaviour each produces →
How a pattern gets written onto a magnet →