Electric field / net charge on a cylindrical shell

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the net charge on a cylindrical shell using Gauss's Law, given its electric field intensity and dimensions. The user initially attempts to solve the problem using the electric field equation but questions whether they are using the correct radius and approach. Clarifications are provided about the use of Gauss's Law and the importance of considering the Gaussian surface's properties, particularly regarding the electric field's behavior at the end caps. The conversation highlights the need for either an approximation or detailed integration to find the exact charge, with suggestions to seek guidance from the instructor for further clarification. Ultimately, the user expresses uncertainty about their calculations and plans to consult their teacher.
csteff
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A cylindrical shell of radius 8.1 cm and length 247 cm has its charge density uniformly distributed on its surface. The electric field intensity at a point 20.3 cm radially outward from its axis (measured from the midpoint of the shell ) is 41800 N/C.
Given: ke =8.99×10^9 N·m^2 /C^2 . What is the net charge on the shell? Answer in units of C.

Homework Equations



Gauss's Law

The Attempt at a Solution



I've been using E=\lambda/2\pi\epsilonr
I used the radius from the midpoint (20.3 cm) in place of the r in the equation and used the given E to solve for \lambda. Then I found the area of the cylindrical shell by doing 2.47*2\pi*.081+2\pi*.081 and multiplied that by the \lambda. I ended up with an answer of 6.1288E-7 the last time I did it.

Is the r supposed to be distance from the surface, maybe? or am I using the completely wrong equation?

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you supposed to approximate the answer using Gauss' law, or are you supposed to find the exact answer through detailed integration? (in other words, which section of your textbook is this problem given? And does your course require lots of calculus?)

Either way, Go back to the original definition of Gauss' law, that gives you a relationship in terms of Q_{enc} / \epsilon _0. That way, you don't need to drag \lambda into things (the question asks for the total charge, not the charge per unit length).

If the particular problem is really looking for an approximation, then that can be done fairly easily. You don't know what the electric field is at the end-caps of the Gaussian surface, but I'm guessing that you are supposed to assume that the electric field component, parallel to the end-caps, contribution is minimal. In other words, I'm guessing that you don't need to include the end caps of the Gaussian surface into the equation.

On the other hand, if you need the exact solution, you will need to integrate over the entire surface, without using the approximation that that the electric field is constant over most of the Gaussian cylinder (I'm guessing that you probably are allowed to make the approximation, but that's just my guess).

And no, r is the center of the cylindrical shell, which also the center of the Gaussian surface too.
 
Last edited:
We're doing Gauss's law, so I'm assuming the approximation is okay.

I did EA=Q/\epsilon and set the A to h*2\pir
(r being the r of the Gaussian surface, .203m)

It wasn't right...what am I doing wrong?
 
h is the length of the cylinder, right? If so, then your equation is right.
 
Ya, sorry.
Okay thanks! I'm not sure why my answer's coming out wrong...I guess I'll just show my teacher my work and see what she says haha
 
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 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top