Charge on a nonconducting rod with a conducting shell

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving a nonconducting rod with a uniform linear charge density and a coaxial conducting cylindrical shell. The participants are exploring the electric field and charge densities on the surfaces of the shell, given that the net charge on the shell is zero.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the net charge being zero on the shell and how it relates to the charge densities on the inner and outer surfaces. There is a focus on whether the charge densities should be equal and opposite, and how to calculate them based on the different radii of the surfaces.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided calculations for the surface charge density on the inner surface and are attempting to apply similar reasoning to the outer surface. There is an ongoing exploration of whether the charge density on the outer surface should be positive or negative, with some guidance offered regarding the signs of the charge densities.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that the charge densities must sum to zero due to the net charge condition of the shell. There is also a mention of the need to consider the different radii when calculating surface charge densities.

reising1
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
A charge of uniform linear density 2.20 nano Coulombs per meter is distributed along a long, thin, nonconducting rod. The rod is coaxial with a long conducting cylindrical shell (inner radius = .0600 m, outer radius = .104 m). The net charge on the shell is zero.

a) What is the magnitude (in N/C) of the electric field at distance r = 16.4 cm from the axis of the shell.
b) What is the charge density on the inner surface of the shell?
c) What is the charge density on the outer surface of the shell?

So that is the full question.
I just need help with part C. I figured out the answer to part a and b. Any insight on part C. I'm thinking it might be 0, but I'm not sure. Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
reising1 said:
The net charge on the shell is zero.
What does that tell you?
 
Does this mean the charge on the inside of the shell is equal but opposite to the charge on the outside of the shell? So that the answer to C would be the same as B except negated?
 
reising1 said:
Does this mean the charge on the inside of the shell is equal but opposite to the charge on the outside of the shell?
Yes.
So that the answer to C would be the same as B except negated?
No. Beware: They are asking for the charge density (charge per unit area), not the charge.
 
But what about the fact that the radius is different on the outer surface. To compute letter B, the charge on the inside, I used the radius.
 
Specifically, for letter B, I computed the surface charge density as

total charge = -(2)(pi)(r)(surface charge density)
2.20 micro Coloumbs = (2)(pi)(.060 m)(surface charge density)
thus,
surface charge density on the inner surface = -5.835E-9

So, would I do this same thing to calculate the surface charge density on the outer surface, except use (.104 m) as the radius?
 
reising1 said:
So, would I do this same thing to calculate the surface charge density on the outer surface, except use (.104 m) as the radius?
Exactly.
 
That is exactly what I did. But the answer is wrong. Should the answer be negative or positive?

I got -3.36673918E-9 C/M^2
 
Just to clarify the computation, I did:

surface charge density = (-2.0E-9 C/m) / (2*pi*.104 m)
That is how I got the -3.36673918E-9 C/M^2

But the answer is wrong.
 
  • #10
reising1 said:
That is exactly what I did. But the answer is wrong. Should the answer be negative or positive?
Positive. The inner surface charge is negative to balance out the rod's positive charge. The charge per unit length on the inner and outer surfaces must add to zero, since the shell has zero net charge.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
780
Replies
1
Views
971
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K