Charge Distribution on Metallic Plates

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the charge distribution on four metallic plates, where plate 2 is charged and plates 1 and 4 are earthed. The key question is whether the outer surfaces of the earthed plates will have zero charge. Participants highlight the confusion caused by the earthed condition, noting that these surfaces maintain a potential of zero, similar to the Earth. To solve the problem, it is suggested to calculate the net potential from all plates and set it to zero, which will help determine the charge distribution. Understanding the implications of the earthed condition is crucial for solving the problem effectively.
surajkaul
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Four identical metallic plates, each of area A, are seprated by a
distance d as showen in the Figure. Plate 2 is given a charge Q. Plates 1 and 4 Both are earthed.

Homework Equations


  • Charge Distribution i.e. Charge on each Plate and On each Side of the Plate.
  • Will the Outer Surface(Earthed Surface) of the Plates 1 and 4 be having Zero Charge on Them.

The Attempt at a Solution


I really Could not figure out as the Earthed Plates are Confusing Me. I have done similar question where the None of the Plates are Earthed. I tried to start on the same Lines, But ended up confusing myself more. So It will be really Great if I get a good Explanation for this.

Thanks in Advance.
Cheers.
 

Attachments

  • 2236789.png
    2236789.png
    539 bytes · Views: 517
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The earthed surface has same potential as Earth - zero. Does this help?
 
aim1732 said:
The earthed surface has same potential as Earth - zero. Does this help?

I know that they at Zero Potential But don't know how to put this Fact to Good Use.
Thanks Anyway. :)
 
You calculate net potential due to all plates at that point and put it equal to zero. This should be related to charges on these plates and hence can give the distribution.
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Sheet of charge - theory
Replies
1
Views
893
Charge on inner/outer surfaces of two large parallel conducting plates
Replies
11
Views
2K
Charge upon a parallel plate capacitor
Replies
18
Views
3K
Point charge with very thin metal sheet along a spherical surface
Replies
21
Views
2K
I Thought I Understood Gauss' Law (Sheets)
Replies
26
Views
2K
Electromagnetism: Force between two charged plates
Replies
1
Views
1K
Uncharged capacitors connected in series
Replies
18
Views
3K
Charge distributions of two infinite parallel plates
Replies
4
Views
2K
Confused about direction of electric field
Replies
7
Views
3K
Find spring constant k using an electrical circuit
Replies
10
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top