Application of Gauss's Law to Charged Insulators

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Gauss's Law to a cylindrical shell with a uniform charge distribution. The problem involves calculating the net charge on the shell and the electric field at a specific radial distance from its axis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Gauss's Law, particularly questioning the use of charge density and the relationship between flux and electric field. There is an exploration of why a specific approach may not yield the expected results.

Discussion Status

The conversation indicates that some participants are grappling with discrepancies between their calculations and the provided solutions. One participant acknowledges an error in their calculations related to a constant, suggesting that guidance has been offered without reaching a consensus on the correct approach.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of using average area charge density and confusion regarding the appropriate use of constants in calculations, which may reflect constraints in the problem setup or assumptions made by participants.

EngineerHead
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A cylindrical shell of radius 7.00 cm and length 240 cm has its charge uniformly distributed on its curved surface. The magnitude of the electric field at a point 19.0 cm ra- dially outward from its axis (measured from the midpoint of the shell) is 36.0 kN/C. Use approximate relationships to find (a) the net charge on the shell and (b) the electric field at a point 4.00 cm from the axis, measured radially outward from the midpoint of the shell.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Could someone please explain to me why this does not work:

Flux = Q/e = E*2pi*r*l

Where I am thinking of Q in terms of an average AREA charge density * the area, and not a line density * a length.
-- Is it because it lacks enough independent equations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you think that doesn't work?
 
Because I am currently getting a different answer than that given by the book - which is:

+913 nC
 
Okay it works... I've been using an incorrect value for e when solving from k - apologies.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K