Electric Field of a Long Charged Ribbon

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field (\vec{E}) generated by a long uniformly charged ribbon in the x-z plane, with a surface charge density (\sigma). Participants analyze two scenarios: (a) determining \vec{E} at a point (x,0,0) where x > a/2, and (b) at (0,y,0) where y > 0. The application of Gauss' Law is emphasized, particularly in treating the ribbon as a collection of infinitely long wires and integrating across its width to account for contributions from all charge elements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gauss' Law in electrostatics
  • Familiarity with electric fields generated by charged surfaces
  • Knowledge of integration techniques in physics
  • Concept of symmetry in electric field calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric fields from surface charge distributions
  • Learn about the application of Gauss' Law for planar geometries
  • Explore integration methods for calculating electric fields from continuous charge distributions
  • Investigate the electric field of an infinite line charge and its implications
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on electromagnetism, as well as educators seeking to enhance their understanding of electric fields generated by charged surfaces.

mr.hood
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A long uniformly charged ribbon is located in the x-z plane, parallel to the z axis, occupying the region -\infty \leq x \leq \infty and -a/2 \leq x \leq a/2. The charge per unit area on the ribbon is \sigma. a) Determine \vec{E} at (x,0,0) where x > a/2. b) Determine \vec{E} at (0,y,0) where y > 0.


Homework Equations


Gauss' Law


The Attempt at a Solution


I'm split on part (a). My intuition tells me that symmetry should make the electric field point only in the \underline{+}y direction, with no component in the \underline{+}x direction. But is this wrong? Should I make a Gaussian surface (say, a box or a cylinder pointing in the x direction) that straddles the edge of the ribbon to test for flux in the x direction?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There will be an E-field in the x-direction for part (a).

Have you looked at the field of a uniformly charged line or wire? You could use that. You'll also need to do an integral.

p.s. welcome to PF!
 
Gauss's law is only useful for planar geometries when the plane either extends to infinity, or you are only looking for the field far from the edges of the plane. Does the ribbon qualify?
 
Ok, so I guess I can treat the ribbon like a line of charge when I'm looking at it from a point on the x-axis... And is it safe to assume I should integrate across the width of the ribbon as well, because of the contributions of all the charge "behind" the edge I'm looking at? I would think I should do the same for part (b), i.e. treat the ribbon as a collection of infinitely long wires and integrate across the width?

Also, good point about Gauss' law. Thanks for the help guys.
 
Last edited:
Well it's actually a surface charge instead of a line charge; so yes you will have to integrate over both x and y. Remember, for a surface charge \sigma(\vec{r'}) you have:

\vec{E}(\vec{r})=\frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_0} \int_{\mathcal{S}} \frac{\sigma(\vec{r'})da'}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r'}|^2} \widehat{|\vec{r}-\vec{r'}|}
 
mr.hood said:
... treat the ribbon as a collection of infinitely long wires and integrate across the width?

Yes, exactly. For both (a) and (b).

edit:
This method assumes you know E for a charged wire ...
 
Easy enough, thanks for the help!

Edit: Haha not so easy I guess... I set up the following integral (for part (a)):

\vec{E} = \frac{2\sigma}{4\pi\epsilon_{o}a}\int^{-a/2}_{a/2}\frac{dx}{x}\hat{x}

When I integrate the 1/x from a/2 to -a/2, I of course get zero. Is my integrand incorrect? Note that the integrand I picked is the electric field of an infinite wire (with sigma/a as the charge density).
 
Last edited:
Scrap that last post, I treated this problem with sort of a surface integral and got an answer (an admittedly strange-looking one):

First I used the equation:

\vec{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{o}} \int_{S}\frac{\sigma(\vec{r'})}{r^{2}}\hat{r}da'

Part (a): \vec{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{o}}\int^{a/2}_{-a/2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{\sigma dz'dx'}{z'^{2}+(x-x')^{2}}cos(\theta)\hat{x}

where z'^{2}+(x-x')^{2} is r2, and

cos(\theta) = \frac{x-x'}{\sqrt{z'^{2}+(x-x')^{2}}}

In this case, x' is the distance from the center of the ribbon (x=0) to my area element, and x-x' is the distance from the area element to the x-coordinate of the point in question, while z' is the z distance from the origin to the area element.

I took a similar approach to part (b):

\vec{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{o}}\int^{a/2}_{-a/2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{\sigma dz'dx'}{x'^{2}+y'^{2}+z'^{2}}cos(\theta)\hat{y}

and

cos(\theta) = \frac{y'}{\sqrt{x'^{2}+y'^{2}+z'^{2}}}

where y' is just the y-distance from the ribbon.

Anyway you can imagine what the integration looks like... and in my final answers I get some logs, which I thought was strange. Do you think these approaches are sensible?
 
Last edited:
Looks reasonable to me.

The line charge idea will work too, but your integrand should be:

dx' / (x-x')

And there is no "a" term in the denominator out front (linear charge density is σdx)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
803
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K