E Field due to 2 parallel oppositely charged strips

jegues
Messages
1,085
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



Two parallel, very long strips are uniformly charged with charge densities \rho_{s} and - \rho_{s}, respectively (\rho_{s} > 0). The cross section of the structure is shown in the figure attached. The width of the strips is the same as the distance between them (i.e. a), and the medium is air. Find the electric field intensity vector at the center of the cross section (point A).

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



See figure attached.

As the figure attached describes, I'm having trouble setting up an integral that will account for the always changing radius as we move along infinitesimily small lengths along the charged strip.

I have to describe this using one parameter, correct? How do I go about doing that?

My answer should of the form,

\vec{E} = -2E_{1} \hat{j}

My problem is finding E_{1}, due to it's ever changing radius. I know I have to use a line integral, but how do I describe is using one parameter? We should integrating along dl, correct? But we also need to describe dl in terms of the radius in order to do the line integral correct?
 

Attachments

  • ATP1.28.JPG
    ATP1.28.JPG
    58.8 KB · Views: 456
Physics news on Phys.org
rude man said:
Think Gauss.

We haven't cover Gauss's law yet, I'm required to do it using a regular line integral.

How would I set the integral up to account for varying radii as we move along small lengths dl along the charged line?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top