Electromagnetic Shielding

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of electromagnetic shielding and the use of a Faraday cage for this purpose. The speaker also explores the idea of using a constant current source to hold the current density static in a region of space in order to block out any incident electromagnetic radiation. However, it is clarified that this method is not effective for shielding and a better understanding of how a Faraday cage works is needed.
  • #1
95
1
I've been thinking about electromagnetic shielding lately.

Of course, you have your good, old-fashioned Faraday cage.

But after staring at Maxwell's equations awhile, I'm thinking:

We're after a static E field, right?

So if we set ## \frac{\partial \textbf{E}}{\partial t}=0## in Ampere's Law, we get

$$\nabla\times \textbf{B}=\mu_0 \textbf{J}$$

Implying that if we can hold the current density ##\textbf{J}## static around a region of space, say with a constant current source, we'd effectively 'fix' the field in that region of space, thus blocking out any incident EM radiation (theoretically)?

For example, if we had a cylinder wrapped around in conducting wire, hooked up to a constant current source, would the field in the interior of the cylinder stay static regardless of what the field outside it was doing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
cuallito said:
We're after a static E field, right?
No. We are after shielding against electromagnetic radiation.

cuallito said:
Implying that if we can hold the current density J static around a region of space, say with a constant current source, we'd effectively 'fix' the field in that region of space, thus blocking out any incident EM radiation (theoretically)?
No. It is not implying that and I am not sure how you arrived at such a conclusion.

cuallito said:
For example, if we had a cylinder wrapped around in conducting wire, hooked up to a constant current source, would the field in the interior of the cylinder stay static regardless of what the field outside it was doing?
No.

Perhaps it would be beneficial to first understand how a Faraday cage works.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #3
cuallito said:
Implying that if we can hold the current J density static around a region of space, say with a constant current source, we'd effectively 'fix' the field in that region of space, thus blocking out any incident EM radiation (theoretically)?
Fields add vectorally, so adding a static field does nothing to "shield" other fields that are present. It just adds a DC field term to the vector sum.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50
  • #4
cuallito said:
I've been thinking about electromagnetic shielding lately.

Of course, you have your good, old-fashioned Faraday cage.

But after staring at Maxwell's equations awhile, I'm thinking:

We're after a static E field, right?

So if we set ## \frac{\partial \textbf{E}}{\partial t}=0## in Ampere's Law, we get

$$\nabla\times \textbf{B}=\mu_0 \textbf{J}$$

Implying that if we can hold the current density ##\textbf{J}## static around a region of space, say with a constant current source, we'd effectively 'fix' the field in that region of space, thus blocking out any incident EM radiation (theoretically)?

For example, if we had a cylinder wrapped around in conducting wire, hooked up to a constant current source, would the field in the interior of the cylinder stay static regardless of what the field outside it was doing?
A Faraday cage is essentially the same as a mirror for visible light frequencies. The way it shields is the charges present on the surface of the conducting shield reorient in response to the external field, this causes an equal and opposite field to appear at the surface of the shield which blocks the primary EM that tries to propagate through.

Somewhat the same way a waveguide for RF frequencies work. The RF wave doesn't get outside the enclosed guide because the inner walls are conducting and they reflect the wave everytime it hits the walls , which it does so after even distances which are related to the wavelength of the wave
 

Suggested for: Electromagnetic Shielding

Replies
3
Views
866
Replies
2
Views
209
Replies
2
Views
393
Replies
4
Views
681
Replies
8
Views
916
Replies
5
Views
870
Back
Top