Conical Surface Potential Difference

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from Electrodynamics concerning a conical surface with a uniform surface charge. Participants are tasked with finding the potential difference between the vertex and the center of the top of the cone, with specific attention to the assumptions made regarding the potential at these points.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the assumption of setting the potential at the vertex to zero and question its validity. There are inquiries about the derivation of the potential at point b and the choice of reference point for zero potential. Some participants seek clarification on the integration process used to calculate the potential.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem and clarifying their understanding of potential calculations. Some have identified misunderstandings in their previous reasoning, while others are verifying the correctness of the expressions used in the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of differing assumptions regarding where the potential is set to zero, and some participants reflect on previous exercises that influenced their current understanding. The potential expressions and their arguments are also under scrutiny, indicating a need for careful consideration of the mathematical details involved.

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