Calculating Magnetic Field Inside a Toroidal Sample Using Ampere's Law

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nylex
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ampere's law Law
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the magnetic field inside a toroidal sample of magnetic material using Ampere's Law. Participants are exploring how to express the magnetic field in terms of the relative permeability of the material.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Ampere's Law, particularly in relation to the magnetic field B and the magnetic field strength H. There are attempts to clarify how to incorporate the relative permeability into the calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the forms of Ampere's Law that should be used, while others are questioning how to relate the magnetic field B to the magnetic field strength H and the relative permeability. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, particularly regarding the constants involved.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the relative permeability being constant, which may affect the integration process in Ampere's Law. Participants are also considering the implications of using different forms of the law based on the number of coils and the nature of the medium.

Nylex
Messages
552
Reaction score
2
Can someone help me with this please?

Consider a toroidal sample of magnetic material wound, uniformly, with coils of wire that carry a current I. If the total number of coils is N and the relative permeability of the material is μr, calculate the magnetic field B, inside the toroid at radius r.

The problem is expressing the magnetic field in terms of the relative permeability. In my notes, I have H = B/μ0μr, but I can't use that can I? I mean, I can't substitute B = μ0μrH into the Ampere's law integral, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course u can,but viceversa,because Ampère's law contains H and u'll need to contain B.

It would be really helpful if that µ_{r} would be constant,as it would come out of the integral,just like I and µ_{0}.

Daniel.
 
you don't need integral for this problem... find H first, then B
H is easy...the formulas for H in a toroidal is...(hints: if your calculation takes you more than 10 seconds, that's mean you are going to a wrong way)
 
dextercioby said:
Of course u can,but viceversa,because Ampère's law contains H and u'll need to contain B.

It would be really helpful if that µ_{r} would be constant,as it would come out of the integral,just like I and µ_{0}.

Daniel.

I have only seen Ampere's law in the form of B . dl = µ0I (well, there's a form for simple media, H . dl = J . dS afaik, but I don't know what I'd use as dS :/). The µr is a constant in the question.

vincentchan said:
you don't need integral for this problem... find H first, then B
H is easy...the formulas for H in a toroidal is...(hints: if your calculation takes you more than 10 seconds, that's mean you are going to a wrong way)

I don't know what the formula for H in a toroid is! The version of Ampere's law with H (without displacement currents) and stuff is the one above.
 
The form of Ampére's law which u'll need is
[tex]\oint_{C} \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{l} =\mu_{0} I[/tex]

which should give you the field created by 1 coil.For N,figure out what should b done.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
The form of Ampére's law which u'll need is
[tex]\oint_{C} \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{l} =\mu_{0} I[/tex]

which should give you the field created by 1 coil.For N,figure out what should b done.

Daniel.

Yeah, I know you just use [tex]\oint_{C} \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{l} =\mu_{0} IN[/tex] for N coils. That wasn't the problem, it was expressing in terms of the relative permeability, which I'm still stuck on.

Thanks.
 
How about
[tex]\oint_{C} \vec{H}\cdot d\vec{l} = IN[/tex]
and [tex]\vec{H}=\vec{B}/\mu[/tex]
 
vincentchan said:
How about
[tex]\oint_{C} \vec{H}\cdot d\vec{l} = IN[/tex]
and [tex]\vec{H}=\vec{B}/\mu[/tex]

Which mu is that? Just [tex]\mu = \mu_{0} \mu_{r}[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
yes... [tex]\mu = \mu_{0} \mu_{r}[/tex]
That is the standard notaion... I used to write [itex]\mu[/itex] instead of [itex]\mu_{0} \mu_{r}[/itex]
 
  • #10
Of course one writes always µ when it comes to magnetic fields in matter,not in vacuum.Just because µ_{0} is an universal constant and µ_{r} is an adimensional constant,it's pointless to always write the product.

Daniel.
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K