Capacitance with dielectric permittivity that depends on r

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating capacitance in a system where dielectric permittivity varies with radial distance (r). The first approach, using the formula $$C = \epsilon_r C_{vac}$$, is invalid due to the position-dependent nature of $$\epsilon_r$$. The second approach, which computes the electric field in the presence of the dielectric and derives capacitance as $$C = \frac{4\pi k}{b-a}$$, is confirmed as correct. The key takeaway is that when dealing with variable permittivity, traditional capacitance equations must be adapted to account for this dependency.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric displacement field (D) and its relation to charge density.
  • Familiarity with capacitance calculations in electrostatics.
  • Knowledge of dielectric materials and their permittivity properties.
  • Proficiency in applying Maxwell's equations in electrostatic scenarios.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of variable dielectric permittivity in electrostatics.
  • Learn about the derivation and application of electric displacement field equations.
  • Explore advanced capacitance calculations in non-uniform dielectric materials.
  • Investigate the relationship between electric field, potential, and capacitance in varying media.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in electrical engineering, physicists working with electrostatics, and researchers focusing on materials science and dielectric properties.

leo_africanus
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
We have a capacitor that is made of two concentric conducting spherical shells having radii a and b (b > a). The region between the spheres is filled with a dielectric material which has permittivity $$\epsilon = \frac{k}{r^2}$$

Charge +Q is placed on the inner sphere, while charge -Q is placed on the outer one. We're asked to find the capacitance of the configuration.
Relevant Equations
$$ C = \frac{Q}{V} $$
$$ C = \epsilon_r C_{vac} $$
$$ V = - \int E \cdot d\ell$$
$$ D = \epsilon_0 E + P = \epsilon E $$
The first part (which I believe I've done correctly) asks us to find the electric displacement everywhere. For this:

$$\int D \cdot da = Q_{f,enc}$$

For a < r < b: $$D = \frac{Q}{4\pi r^2} \hat{r}$$

Otherwise, D = 0

When finding the capacitance, I'm unsure how to handle the r dependence. I tried two approaches that both yield correct units, but I'm not sure which I believe ( if either ).

1st Attempt: Going the route I've found suggested online, I tried computing the electric field without dielectric present, the corresponding capacitance, and then using $$ C = \epsilon_r C_{vac} = \frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon_0} C_{vac}$$ This yields:

$$ E_{vac} = \frac{Q}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r^2} \hat{r} $$

$$ V_{vac} = \frac{Q}{4\pi \epsilon_0}(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{1}{b}) $$

$$ C_{vac} = 4\pi \epsilon_0 \frac{ab}{b-a}$$

Which gives: $$C = \frac{4\pi k}{r^2} \frac{ab}{b-a} $$

But I'm not sure what a capacitance with lingering radial dependence would mean.

2nd Attempt: Here I just tried computing E in the presence of the dielectric, and then finding V from there, and using C = Q/V. We get:

$$ E = \frac{1}{\epsilon} D = \frac{Q}{4\pi k} \hat{r} $$
$$ V = \frac{Q}{4\pi k} (b-a) $$

Which gives:
$$ C = \frac{4\pi k}{b-a} $$

Is either of these approaches along the right track? They give the same result for a "simpler" permittivity like $$ \epsilon = k \epsilon_0$$ The second approach eliminates the presence of r, but seems inconsistent with approaches I've found online and in text when using dielectric constants that lack r dependence. The first approach matches the second one if I multiply V by the r^2 term before integrating -- which may be the mistake in the first approach. I couldn't find any examples where permittivity has position dependence as here. Any insights are much appreciated! Thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
The 2nd attempt looks correct to me.

The 1st method doesn't work since it is based on using ## C = \epsilon_r C_{vac} ##, which is not valid when ##\epsilon_r## varies with position inside the dielectric. ##C## and ##C_{vac}## are just certain numbers (with units). So, the equation ##C = \epsilon_r C_{vac}## implies that ##\epsilon_r## is just a number. But ##\epsilon_r## is a function of ##r## in this problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K