Conical Surface Potential Difference

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the potential difference between two points on a conical surface with a uniform surface charge density σ, as outlined in problem 2.26 from "Electrodynamics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). The user initially assumed the potential at the vertex (point a) to be zero, leading to a calculation of V(b) that differed from the book's solution. The correct potential difference is given by V(a) - V(b) = σh/(2ε) [1 - ln(1 + √2)], highlighting the importance of correctly identifying reference points for potential calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electrostatics, particularly potential due to surface charge distributions.
  • Familiarity with Griffiths' "Electrodynamics" and its problem-solving approach.
  • Knowledge of calculus, specifically integration techniques for evaluating potentials.
  • Concept of electric potential and its reference points in electrostatics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of electric potential from surface charge distributions using integral calculus.
  • Study the concept of reference points in electrostatics and how they affect potential calculations.
  • Practice similar problems from Griffiths' "Electrodynamics" to reinforce understanding of potential differences.
  • Explore the implications of different charge distributions on electric potential and field calculations.
USEFUL FOR

Students of electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of electric potential in electrostatics, particularly in relation to conical geometries and surface charge distributions.

Aroldo
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hey guys!
The question is related to problem 2.26 from Electrodynamics by Griffiths (3ed).

1. Homework Statement

A conical surface (an empty ice-cream cone) carries a uniform surface charge σ. The height of the cone is h, as the radius of the top. Find the potential difference between points a (the vertex) and b (the center of the top).

Homework Equations


Here I will call the potential V.

First of all, I assumed that at the vertex: V(a) = 0. (I can do that because I'm interested in V(b) - V(a), am I right?)

Then I calculated V(b). So:
V(a) - V(b) = - V(b) = -σh/(2ε) * ln (1 + (21/2/2))

But the book's solution didn't consider V(a) = 0, and found:
V(a) - V(b) = σh/(2ε) [1 - ln (1 + (21/2/2))]

Finally, my questions are:
Why is my assumption wrong?
How to calculate it assuming V(b) = 0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Aroldo said:
First of all, I assumed that at the vertex: V(a) = 0. (I can do that because I'm interested in V(b) - V(a), am I right?)

Then I calculated V(b). So:
V(a) - V(b) = - V(b) = -σh/(2ε) * ln (1 + (21/2/2))
In deriving your expression for V(b), where did you choose V to be zero?
 
TSny said:
In deriving your expression for V(b), where did you choose V to be zero?
At the point a = (0,0,0)
 
Can you show an outline of your derivation of your expression for V(b)?
 
Yes, of course.
r is the vector along the central axis and r' is the vector along the conical surface.

$$ V(b) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\int_0^b{\frac{\sigma\cdot da'}{|\textbf{r}-\textbf{r}'|}} = \frac{\sigma}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\sqrt{2}\pi\int_0^{\sqrt{2}h}\frac{r'dr'}{\sqrt{r'^2 + h^2 -\sqrt{2}hr'}} = \frac{\sigma h}{2\epsilon_0}\ln (1+\sqrt{2}) $$
 
Last edited:
Aroldo said:
$$ V(b) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\int_0^b{\frac{\sigma\cdot da}{|\textbf{r}-\textbf{r}'|}} $$
The integrand represents the potential at b due to a small element of charge ##\sigma da##. It has the form ##V = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac{q}{r}## for a point charge. Note that this expression assumes a particular place where V = 0. Where is that place?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Aroldo
For a point charge, V = 0 at the infinity.
You helped me a lot to identify my own misunderstanding. In the previous exercise that I solved the potential wouldn't go to 0 at the infinity (it was due to a infinity distribution).

Thank you a lot!
 
OK.

I'm not quite getting the result that you quoted as the given solution. I get that the argument of the log should be ##1 + \sqrt{2}## rather than ##1 + \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}## . But I could be messing up somewhere.
 
No no, you are right. My mistake. I already edited there.

Thanks again.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K