Electric field of non-conducting cylinder

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of the electric field of a non-conducting cylinder, with initial calculations yielding E = 106.73 N/C based on λ = 2.49 * 10^-10 C/m. Participants question the correctness of the formula used, specifically E = λ / (2πεx^2), suggesting it should be E = λ / (2πεx) instead. There is confusion regarding dimensional analysis, with one participant asserting their calculations are correct despite feedback indicating a potential error. The conversation emphasizes the importance of applying Gauss's law correctly and acknowledges that the E-field has cylindrical symmetry, negating the need for integrals in this case. Ultimately, the participants agree on the necessity of revisiting the equations used for accurate results.
MahalMuh
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
We have a very long and non-conducting cylinder with radius r=0.021 m and even charge distribution with volume density ρ=0.18 μC/m3.

a) What is the electric field outside the cylinder with x=0.042 m from the axis of cylinder?
b) What is the electric field inside the cylinder with y=0.0087 m from the axis of cylinder?
Relevant Equations
Q=λl = ρAl = lρπr^2 (charge caused) (1)
E = λ / (2πεx^2) (electric field of cylinder) (2)
ε = 8.8542*10^-12 C^2/(Nm^2)
a) I have calculated (1) λ = ρA = ρπr^2 = 2.49 * 10^-10 C/m and placed it into (2) yielding E = λ / (2πεx^2) = 106.73 N/C.

This doesn't seem to be correct by the feedback, however.

b) Here just to consider the proportion of the cylinder mass constrained by y.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MahalMuh said:
E = λ / (2πεx^2) = 106.73 N/C.
Are you sure that calculation yields N/C? Check the dimensions.
 
haruspex said:
Are you sure that calculation yields N/C? Check the dimensions.

My checking says yes it does but I'm probably wrong.
 
MahalMuh said:
My checking says yes it does but I'm probably wrong.
##[\rho]=QL^{-3}##
##[r^2]=L^2##
##[x^{-2}]=L^{-2}##
##[\frac1{\epsilon_0}]=ML^3T^{-2}Q^{-2}##
From which I get ##MT^{-2}Q^{-1}##, not ##MLT^{-2}Q^{-1}##.

Where do you think you might have lost a dimension L?
 
Your mistake is in No.2 of the equations in the list of relevant equations. Check again your theory and how we do apply Gauss's law in integral form to determine the electric field in this system.
 
Actually I had it right, just had it rounded wrong. No need for integrals here. In b) the proportion was opposite / complement of what my intuition said.
 
MahalMuh said:
Actually I had it right, just had it rounded wrong. No need for integrals here. In b) the proportion was opposite / complement of what my intuition said.
You fooled us both by misquoting an equation. You wrote
MahalMuh said:
E = λ / (2πεx^2)
which is wrong, but to get the answer you got you must have used the correct version:
E = λ / (2πεx)
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
haruspex said:
You fooled us both by misquoting an equation. You wrote

which is wrong, but to get the answer you got you must have used the correct version:
E = λ / (2πεx)

True, thanks for spotting. Keyboard always trickier than pen & paper.
 
MahalMuh said:
No need for integrals here
No actually we don't do an integral because the E-field has azimuthal and z symmetry (cylindrical symmetry in one word), however we apply the integral form of Gauss's law to correctly calculate the E-field, inside and outside of the thin cylinder.
 
Back
Top