Calculating EMF Around a Square in a Magnetic Field

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the electromotive force (emf) around a square in a magnetic field, the formula ε = -d/dt Φ is utilized, where Φ represents the magnetic flux. The magnetic field is given as 4t²y, and the integration limits for the area should be adjusted to reflect the correct unit system, with SI units suggesting limits of 0 to 0.02 meters instead of 0 to 2. There is a consensus that the initial approach to calculating the emf is correct, but there are concerns about unit consistency. It is important to verify the units of distance, magnetic field, and voltage to ensure accurate results.
gadje
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A square of side 2cm, in the first quadrant of the x-y plane, with a corner at the origin, is in a magnetic field pointing out of the page of magnitude 4t2y.

Calculate the emf around the square at t = 2.5s and give its direction.

Homework Equations



\epsilon = - \frac{d}{dt} \Phi

The Attempt at a Solution



Do I do it like this?

\epsilon = -\frac{d}{dt} \int ^2 _0 \int ^2 _0 4t^2 y \ dx \ dy

If so, then great. If not, what do I do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yeah, that seems correct as you are just using the definition of flux:
\phi = \int \vec{B} \cdot \vec{dA}

And subbing that into your above expression for the emf.

It looks correct but I'm not certain as I'm only a mere first year so you should probably get someone else to confirm.
 
It looks correct, but I would double check the units of distance, magnetic field and voltage. What system of units are you using for Maxwell's equations? I normally use SI units with meters, Telsa and Volts, so I would have set my upper limits at 0.02 rather than 2. However, if you are using CGS units it may be correct - just double check it.
 
Yeah, I screwed up the units in the OP; had them right in my paper calculation.
 
gadje said:
Yeah, I screwed up the units in the OP; had them right in my paper calculation.

OK, good! I guess you're using SI units. I think with cgs (or, more accurately Gaussian) units there might be a speed of light factor involved.
 
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