Electrostatic force between two arbitrary shapes

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the electrostatic force between charged surfaces with non-standard shapes, specifically using the approach of segmenting surfaces into simpler shapes. It raises the question of whether the total force can be calculated by simply adding the forces between segments, noting that forces are vectors and should be treated accordingly. A particular challenge is posed by calculating the force between conical surfaces, where charge concentration increases at sharp edges. Participants emphasize the need for a formula to quantify charge density at these points to facilitate calculations. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities involved in applying electrostatic principles to irregular geometries.
yiorgos
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
I am looking some help on applying the well known formula of the electrostatic force between two parallel capacitor plates on charged surfaces which have non usual shapes.
My approach is to break apart the total surface into segments with common shapes
and calculating the force between each two of them. Although this approach neglects the mutual interaction among one segment with all the others I think it would result in an acceptable approximation. My question is if the total force is given by arithmetically adding all the single forces or it is more complicated.

My second and more important for me question is how to calculate the force between two surfaces when the shape of one or both of them is that of a cone. I already know that at sharp surfaces the charge concentration is increased but I can't find any formula for calculating it.

Third and last, for two given surfaces, which are the shapes resulting in the greatest electrostatic force between them?

Thanks in advance for your time
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
yiorgos said:
I am looking some help on applying the well known formula of the electrostatic force between two parallel capacitor plates on charged surfaces which have non usual shapes.
My approach is to break apart the total surface into segments with common shapes
and calculating the force between each two of them. Although this approach neglects the mutual interaction among one segment with all the others I think it would result in an acceptable approximation. My question is if the total force is given by arithmetically adding all the single forces or it is more complicated.

This is not really an answer, just a note of caution. Forces are vectors, so you can't add them arithmetically. Break them into the three Cartesian components, and add those arithmetically.
 
Thanks for your reply.
You are right, I had in mind the parallel plate case where all forces are parallel.

But still I can't figure out how to manipulate the case of the cone (two cones).
Any suggestions on this?
 
I will really have to think about that one. If anything comes to my mind, I'll let you know. The vertex of the cone is not smooth...
 
That's why the charge density is increased as we get closer to the edge.
If you can quantify the above density then you can relatively easy calculate
the force between them.
But as I said I can't find any formula of calculating that.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top