Determain thickness of layers in cylindrical capacitor

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the thickness of the inner layer of a cylindrical capacitor with two coaxial cylinders and different dielectric constants. The user initially struggles with the voltage drop equations across both layers, leading to an incorrect expression for the thickness. After revisiting the equations and correcting the displacement field, they derive the correct formula for the thickness, δ, as a function of the radii and dielectric constants. The final solution is presented as δ = {r_0}^{ \frac{\epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}} · {r_1}^{ \frac{\epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}} - r_0. This resolution highlights the importance of careful analysis in electrostatics problems.
Vernes
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


We have two coaxial cylinders with radius r0 and r1. The space between the two cylinders is completely coverd with two coaxial isolation layers with relative dielectric constants ε1 and ε2, ε1 is for the inner layer. Calculate the thickness of the inner layer such that the voltage drop over both layers is equal.

Homework Equations


\oint \textbf{D} \cdot d\textbf{S}
\textbf{D} = \epsilon_0 \epsilon_r \textbf{E}
V(r_2) - V(r_1) =- \int_{r_1}^{r_2} \textbf{E} \cdot d\textbf{l}

The Attempt at a Solution


Let Qinside be the free charge inside where r < r0 and let δ be the thickness of the inner layer.
Then from symmetry we get when r0 < r < r1 :
\textbf{D(r)} = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi r^2} \hat{r}
So the electric field E1 for r0 < r < (r0 + δ) is:
\textbf{E}_1 = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_1 r^2} \hat{r}
and the electric field E2 for (r0 + δ)< r < r1 is:
\textbf{E}_2 = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_2 r^2} \hat{r}
The voltage drop over the first layer is given by:
V(r_0 + \delta) - V(r_0) =- \int_{r_1}^{r_1 + \delta} \textbf{E}_1 \cdot d\textbf{l} = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_1}(\frac{1}{r_0 + \delta} - \frac{1}{r_0} )
The voltage drop over the second layer is given by:
V(r_1) - V(r_0 + \delta) =- \int_{r_1 + \delta}^{r_2} \textbf{E}_2 \cdot d\textbf{l} = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_2}(\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0 + \delta} )
The voltage drops should be equal to we get:
\frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_2}(\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0 + \delta}) = \frac{Q_{inside}}{4\pi \epsilon_0 \epsilon_1}(\frac{1}{r_0 + \delta} - \frac{1}{r_0}) \Leftrightarrow \delta = \frac{(r_1-r_0)\epsilon_1 r_0} {\epsilon_2 r_1 + \epsilon_1 r_0}
This is not the right answer according to the key but i can't seem to find where I go wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, I see one error that i did. D should be:
\textbf{D} = \frac{Q_{inside}}{2\pi L r}\hat{r}
Similar steps as before gives me:
\frac{1}{\epsilon_1} \ln \frac{r_0+\delta}{r_0} = \frac{1}{\epsilon_2} \ln \frac{r_1}{r_0+\delta}
My remaining question is then how do i solve for δ in the equation above?

Edit: Ok, I was a bit to hasty, it wasn't so hard to solve for δ as i expected...
If anyone is interested I got:
\delta = {r_0}^{ \frac{\epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}} \cdot {r_1}^{ \frac{\epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}} - r_0
Which is the right answer!
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top