EMF, curled or straight antenna

  • Thread starter Thread starter vs5813
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antenna Emf
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electromotive force (EMF) in straight versus curled antennas in the context of electromagnetic fields. It highlights that a straight antenna responds primarily to the electric field, allowing for a straightforward calculation of EMF as the product of the electric field and the wire length. In contrast, the curled antenna's EMF is questioned, with the assumption that if the magnetic field is not changing, the EMF may be zero. Participants explore the implications of the Poynting vector and the constancy of the electric and magnetic fields based on given power and area. The conversation also touches on the significance of root mean square (RMS) values in analyzing periodic functions.
vs5813
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
hmm just a topic for discussion..im revising for an exam and i found an old paper asking to find rms values of electric field and magnetic field from power...and that's easy, using the poynting vector. Then it asks, given a piece of wire of length l in these fields, you can either use it as a straight antenna or as a curled antenna: what is EMF in the wire in each case?

Ok, so i was thinking about how id answer, i know that if i were to use it as a straight antenna, i'd be causing it to respond to the E, while if i used it curled it would be responding to B. But how could i go about calculating it?

An equation i could use is EMF = - B (dA/dt)..but how do i relate it to the electric field in the straight antenna case?

Any thoughts greatly appreciated..! :redface:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
im pretty sure that if you were going to use it as a straight wire you will just have an e field * the length of the wire, gives the voltage drop across the wire
 
oh! i just realized...the straight antenna case is actually easier to think about:

EMF = integral_from_0_to_l[E*dl]

which in this case just means: EMF = El if the two of them are parallel.

but the curled antenna...wouldn't the emf just be zero? The B field is not changing, and the area can't be changing either if the loop is of constant radius...
 
"The B field is not changing,"
Why do you say that?
 
hmm...should i not assume that? because in the first part of the problem they gave us the emitted power and area so we could find the poynting vector, and from that we can find the numerical value of the rms E and B fields..so i assumed they would stay constant...
 
vs5813 said:
oh! i just realized...the straight antenna case is actually easier to think about:

EMF = integral_from_0_to_l[E*dl]

which in this case just means: EMF = El if the two of them are parallel.

but the curled antenna...wouldn't the emf just be zero? The B field is not changing, and the area can't be changing either if the loop is of constant radius...

lol you figured it out or i told you
vs5813 said:
hmm...should i not assume that? because in the first part of the problem they gave us the emitted power and area so we could find the poynting vector, and from that we can find the numerical value of the rms E and B fields..so i assumed they would stay constant...

what does RMS mean and why do you take the RMS of a function over a period
 
Last edited:
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top