Conductance per unit length of a co-axial cable (Intro to Electromagnetics)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the conductance per unit length, G', of a coaxial cable, starting from the relationship between current and voltage, and utilizing the electric field generated by a line charge on the center conductor. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and technical explanations related to electromagnetics.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about integrating the electric field and obtaining the correct logarithmic term in the denominator for conductance.
  • Another participant suggests that the numerator can be evaluated due to the symmetry of the electric field, while the denominator is straightforward.
  • A participant provides a detailed calculation of the surface integral and line integral, arriving at a result involving the natural logarithm of the ratio of the outer to inner conductor radii.
  • Some participants discuss the need for integration in calculating voltage but not for current, citing the relationship between electric field and surface area.
  • Visual aids are suggested to clarify the integration process, with references to specific surfaces in the coaxial setup.
  • Several participants confirm a final expression for conductance as \(\frac{2\pi\sigma}{\ln(\frac{b}{a})}\), but it is unclear if this is universally accepted as the definitive answer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is a mix of agreement and confusion among participants regarding the integration process and the derivation of the conductance formula. While some participants arrive at the same final expression, others express uncertainty about the steps taken to reach that conclusion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the need for clarity in the integration steps and the assumptions made regarding the electric field's uniformity and symmetry. There are unresolved questions about the necessity of certain integrals and the interpretation of the results.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students studying electromagnetics, particularly those working on problems related to coaxial cables and conductance calculations.

peterpiper
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Starting with:

G = \frac{I}{V}= \frac{-\int_{s}\sigma\mathbf{E}\cdot d\boldsymbol{s}}{-\int_{l}\boldsymbol{E}\cdot d\boldsymbol{l}}

Derive the conductance per unit length, G', of a coaxial cable by assuming a line charge of \rho_{l} on the center conductor.

Homework Equations



\boldsymbol{E}=\boldsymbol{\hat{r}}\frac{\rho _{l}}{2\pi\epsilon_{0}r}

Let a be the radius of the inner conductor and let b be the radius of the outer conductor.

The Attempt at a Solution



So far my only attempt has been plugging E straight into the integrals with the region of integration being a to b on both integrals and 0 to 2\pi on the double integral. I get the correct coefficient of 2\pi\sigma but I'm supposed to have a ln(b/a) in the denominator. I'm kinda baffled as to what I'm supposed to do. I'm assuming I'm doing something stupid in the double integral but those never were my strong suit in math. Any help would be greatly appreciated as this is the last bit of work I need to do to finish my E-Mag course. Thanks in advance for anything you may be able to offer me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The numerator can be evaluated algebraically because of the symmetry of the E field on any coaxial cylindrical surface. The denominator is a trivial integral. It's hard to imagine how you got it wrong without seeing how your integrations were done.
peterpiper said:

Homework Statement



Starting with:

G = \frac{I}{V}= \frac{-\int_{s}\sigma\mathbf{E}\cdot d\boldsymbol{s}}{-\int_{l}\boldsymbol{E}\cdot d\boldsymbol{l}}

Derive the conductance per unit length, G', of a coaxial cable by assuming a line charge of \rho_{l} on the center conductor.

Homework Equations



\boldsymbol{E}=\boldsymbol{\hat{r}}\frac{\rho _{l}}{2\pi\epsilon_{0}r}

Let a be the radius of the inner conductor and let b be the radius of the outer conductor.

The Attempt at a Solution



So far my only attempt has been plugging E straight into the integrals with the region of integration being a to b on both integrals and 0 to 2\pi on the double integral. I get the correct coefficient of 2\pi\sigma but I'm supposed to have a ln(b/a) in the denominator. I'm kinda baffled as to what I'm supposed to do. I'm assuming I'm doing something stupid in the double integral but those never were my strong suit in math. Any help would be greatly appreciated as this is the last bit of work I need to do to finish my E-Mag course. Thanks in advance for anything you may be able to offer me.
 
For the surface integral I did this:

-\sigma\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{a}^{b}\frac{\rho_{l}}{2\pi\epsilon_0r}drd\phi=-\sigma\int_{a}^{b}\frac{2\pi\rho_l}{2\pi\epsilon_0r}dr=\frac{-\sigma\rho_l}{\epsilon_0}ln(\frac{b}{a})

For the line integral I did this:

\int_{a}^{b}\frac{\rho_{l}}{2\pi\epsilon_0r}dr= \frac{\rho_l}{2\pi\epsilon_0}ln(\frac{b}{a})

This leaves me with a result of -2\pi\sigma correct?
 
Last edited:
The surface integral represents how many charges leaked through a cylindrical surface per unit time. Select such a surface somewhere between the inner and outer conductor by selecting a fixed r. Hence the r should be constant in the first integral. An notice that E is perpendicular and uniform to the surface everywhere.

peterpiper said:
For the surface integral I did this:
-\sigma\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{a}^{b}\frac{\rho_{l}}{2\pi\epsilon_0r}drd\phi=-\sigma\int_{a}^{b}\frac{2\pi\rho_l}{2\pi\epsilon_0r}dr=\frac{-\sigma\rho_l}{\epsilon_0}ln(\frac{b}{a})
 
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at.
 
Maybe a picture helps. The surface you're trying to integrate is the blue one as shown in the picture. http://www.physics.sjsu.edu/becker/physics51/images/23_16Cylinder.JPG

since r is constant, you don't need to integrate. the E field is uniform on and perpendicular to the surface. You don't need to integrate at all.


peterpiper said:
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: peterpiper
You don't need to integrate to get I. You do need to integrate to get V.

The reason you don't need to integrate to get I is that E(r) ~ 1/r and S ~ r so the r's cancel.

But when you do the line integral of abE*dr you are actually integrating.

You can double-check your answer by computing the total resistance R from r = a to r = b directly, then G = 1/R = I/V.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: peterpiper
Thank you so much for that. I feel ridiculous for not just drawing a picture. It's funny how PHYS212 gets overshadowed by ENGE360.
 
peterpiper said:
Thank you so much for that. I feel ridiculous for not just drawing a picture. It's funny how PHYS212 gets overshadowed by ENGE360.

So what's your answer?
 
  • #10
\frac{2\pi\sigma}{ln(\frac{b}{a})}
 
  • #11
bingo!
peterpiper said:
\frac{2\pi\sigma}{ln(\frac{b}{a})}
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: peterpiper
  • #12
peterpiper said:
\frac{2\pi\sigma}{ln(\frac{b}{a})}

Bingo again! Good work!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: peterpiper

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K