Electric field of a hollow cylinder

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field of a hollow cylinder using integration of thin rings. The initial approach involved using the equation for a thin ring, leading to an expression for the electric field, but the user identified a mistake in the distance representation. The corrected formula for the electric field is given as ##E_x=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+(w-L)^2}}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+w^2}}\right]##. This final expression correctly incorporates the observation point distance, ##w##, and the radius, ##R##, of the cylinder.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric fields and Coulomb's law
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically integration techniques
  • Knowledge of vector representation in physics
  • Basic concepts of electrostatics, including charge distribution
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric fields from continuous charge distributions
  • Learn about Gauss's Law and its applications in electrostatics
  • Explore limit tests for validating electric field calculations
  • Investigate the behavior of electric fields in different geometries, such as spheres and plates
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on electromagnetism, as well as educators looking for practical examples of electric field calculations.

Zack K
Messages
166
Reaction score
6
Homework Statement
A thin-walled hollow circular glass tube, open at both ends, has a radius R and length L. The axis of the tube lies along the x axis, with the left end at the origin. The outer sides are rubbed with silk and acquire a net positive charge +Q distributed uniformly. Determine the electric field at a location on the x axis, a distance w from the origin. s
Relevant Equations
##E_{ring}=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Qz}{(R^2+z^2)^{3/2}}##
I uploaded a diagram of the problem.

I treated this as many thin rings and integrated it over the length. I placed my origin as in the same place as the uploaded picture.

Finding the electric field due to one small ring:

##\vec r =\langle w-x, 0, 0 \rangle## where ##x## is the distance of the thin ring from the origin.
##|\vec r|= w-x## ##\therefore \hat r=1##

Now this is the spot where I'm sure I made a mistake. So using the equation of a thin ring, and representing that infinitesimally, we get:
##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{\Delta Q x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

##\Delta Q=Q\left(\frac{2\pi R\Delta x}{2\pi R L}\right)=Q\frac{\Delta x}{L}##

##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{(Q\frac{\Delta x }{L})x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

Integrating from ##x=0## to ##x=L##:

##E=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\int_0^L \frac{x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}dx##

Solving that integral, we get:

##E=\frac{KQ}{2L}\left( -\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+L^2}}+\frac{1}{R} \right)##

This doesn't seem right at all, and I have no way of checking since my book doesn't have the answer for this. My classes are over and my professor is at some conference, and I can't use Gauss's Law to check my answer since the electric field at that point is pointing in different directions.
 

Attachments

  • w0052.png
    w0052.png
    1.4 KB · Views: 655
Physics news on Phys.org
Zack K said:
I uploaded a diagram of the problem.

I treated this as many thin rings and integrated it over the length. I placed my origin as in the same place as the uploaded picture.

Finding the electric field due to one small ring:

##\vec r =\langle w-x, 0, 0 \rangle## where ##x## is the distance of the thin ring from the origin.
##|\vec r|= w-x## ##\therefore \hat r=1##

Now this is the spot where I'm sure I made a mistake. So using the equation of a thin ring, and representing that infinitesimally, we get:
##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{\Delta Q x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

##\Delta Q=Q\left(\frac{2\pi R\Delta x}{2\pi R L}\right)=Q\frac{\Delta x}{L}##

##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{(Q\frac{\Delta x }{L})x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

Integrating from ##x=0## to ##x=L##:

##E=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\int_0^L \frac{x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}dx##

Solving that integral, we get:

##E=\frac{KQ}{2L}\left( -\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+L^2}}+\frac{1}{R} \right)##

This doesn't seem right at all, and I have no way of checking since my book doesn't have the answer for this. My classes are over and my professor is at some conference, and I can't use Gauss's Law to check my answer since the electric field at that point is pointing in different directions.
Yes, It's not correct.

In the diagram you provided (see immediately below) it looks like ##w## may be the point of observation on the ##x\text{-axis}##. That is to say, you intend to evaluate the electric field at ##x=w\,.##

241771


In that case your result should depend on ##w## .

In the Relevant equation you give,
##\displaystyle E_{ring}=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Qz}{(R^2+z^2)^{3/2}} \ ,##​
what do the variables represent? In particular, what does ##z## represent?
 
SammyS said:
In particular, what does zzz represen
My bad, ##z## represents an arbitrary location, ##Q## is the charge of the ring and ##R## is the radius of the ring.

SammyS said:
In that case your result should depend on w
Yes that's what bothers me, my answer doesn't depend on a distance.

I think my mistake lies some where from the transition from
##E_{ring}=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Qz}{(R^2+z^2)^{3/2}}## to ##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{\Delta Q x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

Something that comes to mind, is that my distance vector is represented as ##\vec r= \langle w-x, 0, 0 \rangle##, but in my transition from ##E## to ##dE## I stated above, I labelled the distance as simply ##x##. Should it maybe be ##w-x## instead of just ##x##?
 
Zack K said:
My bad, ##z## represents an arbitrary location, ##Q## is the charge of the ring and ##R## is the radius of the ring.Yes that's what bothers me, my answer doesn't depend on a distance.

I think my mistake lies some where from the transition from
##E_{ring}=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Qz}{(R^2+z^2)^{3/2}}## to ##dE=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{\Delta Q x}{(R^2+x^2)^{3/2}}##

Something that comes to mind, is that my distance vector is represented as ##\vec r= \langle w-x, 0, 0 \rangle##, but in my transition from ##E## to ##dE## I stated above, I labelled the distance as simply ##x##. Should it maybe be ##w-x## instead of just ##x##?
Yes, ##z## is something like that. Actually, ##z## is the distance from the point of observation to the plane containing the ring. That's the x-coordinate of your ##\vec r ## vector. Right?

##x## represents the location a slice of your cylinder (a ring) and ##w## is the location of the point of observation. (Both locations are on the x-axis.)

How far is each slice from the point of observation?
 
Last edited:
SammyS said:
How far is each slice from the point of observation?
Isn't it how I represented it? As ##w-x##?

I'll try integrating this and see what I get.
 
Zack K said:
Isn't it how I represented it? As ##w-x##?

I'll try integrating this and see what I get.
What ##d## ?

No. It's ##(w-x)##, is it not?
 
SammyS said:
What ##d## ?

No. It's ##(w-x)##, is it not?
Yes sorry I changed it, ##d-w## is from another problem stuck in my head.

So I carried out ##E=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\int_0^L \frac{(w-x)}{(R^2+(w-x)^2)^{3/2}}dx##

Giving me: ##E_x=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+(w-L)^2}}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+w^2}}\right]##

Looks like it makes more sense, but doesn't look pretty. How exactly do I test to see if this makes sense? I can't think of any limit tests that will clarify if the result is valid.
 
Zack K said:
Yes sorry I changed it, ##d-w## is from another problem stuck in my head.

So I carried out ##E=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\int_0^L \frac{(w-x)}{(R^2+(w-x)^2)^{3/2}}dx##

Giving me: ##E_x=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{Q}{L}\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+(w-L)^2}}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+w^2}}\right]##

Looks like it makes more sense, but doesn't look pretty. How exactly do I test to see if this makes sense? I can't think of any limit tests that will clarify if the result is valid.
That looks good.

Let ##R \to 0## .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zack K

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
804
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
649