Calculating Motional EMF when v not perpendicular to B

AI Thread Summary
To calculate motional EMF when the velocity is not perpendicular to the magnetic field, the general equation ε = ∮ (v x B) · dl is applicable. The term dl represents a small segment of the wire, allowing for the calculation of the force component along the wire. The first equation, ε = vBL, is only valid when the velocity and magnetic field are perpendicular. Understanding the vector cross product v x B is crucial, as it gives the magnetic force vector. This approach provides a comprehensive method for determining EMF in more complex scenarios.
vaizard
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm trying to figure out how you can calculate motional EMF when the velocity of the object in question is not perpendicular to the magnetic field. There are two equations in my textbook, but the text describing them is not very helpful.

The first is \varepsilon = vBL, which can be used when B\perp v and B\perp L. The second is \varepsilon = \oint (\vec v \times \vec B) \cdot d\vec l which is the general form. The first one won't work if they're not perpendicular, and I don't understand what the d\vec l is for in the second one. Could someone explain that to me?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
vaizard said:
… I don't understand what the d\vec l is for in the second one. Could someone explain that to me?

Hi vaizard! :smile:

v x B is the magnetic force vector

dl is a short length of the wire

the force won't necessarily be along the wire, so (v x B).dl is the component of force along the wire :wink:
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top