Calculating Ambient Electric Fields in Thunderclouds for Aircraft Safety

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the ambient electric field experienced by an aircraft flying through a thundercloud with specific charge concentrations. The initial approach used the formula F = kQ1Q2 / r^2, but there was confusion regarding the correct distance and the magnitude of the charges involved. After converting kilometers to meters, the calculations yielded an unexpectedly large value for the electric field. Participants noted that the charge of 40C is excessively high, suggesting a reevaluation of the parameters used in the calculations. The conversation highlights the need for clarity in physics concepts and proper unit conversions in electric field calculations.
Binkey24
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Sorry if i have posted under the wrong catagorie physics is new to me so I am still getting my head around it.

Here is the question that is giving me a bit of bother;
An airplane is flying through a thunder cloud at an altitude of 2km. If the cloud has a charge concentration of 40C at an altitude of 3km above the ground and -40C at 1km altitude. What is the ambient electric field exsperienced by the air craft?
Additional information k = 9 x 10^9 N-m/C^2)

so far i have think the equations to be used are F=kQ,Q2 / r^2

this is what i get when i fill the following information = (9*10^9)*(40)*(-40) / 1^2

this equaling -1.44^13
Am i going the right way about it or have i missed a few steps? any guidance would greatly be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Convert kilometer to meter.
 
After changing the km into meters

(9*10^9) * (40) * (-40) / 1000^2

this gave me answer of = - 14400000
this answer seems a little big. or is it meant to be this large?
 
Hmm 40C is wayyy too big. But anyways, your not answering the question. What is the electric field experienced by the plane question mark. (Sorry keyboard problems)
 
Not sure if I can help at all, I'm stuck in the same place. I think we are studdying the same thing.
 
Just found this, hope it helps:

See attachment, it didn't want to past in here.

Edit: Note the diference in k from your origional question.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top