Find the density of surface charges at the boundary of two conductors with different resistivities

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding the density of surface charges at the boundary of two conductors with differing resistivities using Gauss's law. The initial setup involves a Gaussian pillbox to analyze the electric fields and surface charge density. Participants confirm the validity of the derived equation but note that the lack of a specified cross-sectional area (A) creates ambiguity in determining the surface charge density (σ). It is highlighted that the answer for σ depends on A, and there is confusion regarding whether the provided answer refers to charge density or total charge. The conversation concludes with agreement on the need for clarification in the problem statement regarding current and charge density.
tellmesomething
Messages
436
Reaction score
66
Homework Statement
Two cylindrical conductors with equal cross sections and different resistivities p1 and p2 are put end to, end as shown in figure-3.11.
Find the density of surface charges at the boundary of the conductors if a current I flows from conductor I to conductor 2 .
Relevant Equations
None
I tried using gauss law. This is how i set it up: I took a gaussian pill box of same area and very small length dx, the diagram is amplified for obvious reasons.

Assuming theres a constant field in the yellow portion ##E_{1}## and a constant field ##E_{2}## in the green portion. I assume the area of cross section as ##A## and surface charge density as ##\sigma##

$$(\frac{\rho_{2} I}{A} - \frac{\rho_{1} I}{A})A = \frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_{0}}$$

Is this valid? Because it doesnt get me the answer as i do not know what ##A## is.

pic.png
i
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your work looks correct
tellmesomething said:
$$(\frac{\rho_{2} I}{A} - \frac{\rho_{1} I}{A})A = \frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_{0}}$$
This looks good.

tellmesomething said:
Is this valid? Because it doesnt get me the answer as i do not know what ##A## is.
The answer for ##\sigma## will depend on the cross-sectional area ##A##. The problem statement is a little inconsistent in not providing a symbol for the cross-sectional area while it does provide symbols for the current and resistivities.
 
  • Like
Likes tellmesomething
You have derived the boundary condition for the discontinuity of the normal component of the electric field at the interface between conductors. That is correct. You are also correct in saying that you need the area. Think of it this way, two setups like this carrying the same current ##I## but having different cross sectional areas will have different surface charge densities at the interface.

On edit:
I see that @TSny has preempted me (again.) I will leave this post up as additional confirmation.
 
  • Like
Likes tellmesomething
TSny said:
Your work looks correct

This looks good.


The answer for ##\sigma## will depend on the cross-sectional area ##A##. The problem statement is a little inconsistent in not providing a symbol for the cross-sectional area while it does provide symbols for the current and resistivities.
Yes i did a unit check as well and the answer given in the key is ##\epsilon_0(\rho_{2}-\rho_{1})I## , the unit comes out to be Coulumb instead of Coulumb per sqaured meter. I guess they meant charge instead of charge density.
 
  • Like
Likes TSny and kuruman
kuruman said:
You have derived the boundary condition for the discontinuity of the normal component of the electric field at the interface between conductors. That is correct. You are also correct in saying that you need the area. Think of it this way, two setups like this carrying the same current ##I## but having different cross sectional areas will have different surface charge densities at the interface.

On edit:
I see that @TSny has preempted me (again.) I will leave this post up as additional confirmation.
Yes thankyou :)
 
tellmesomething said:
I guess they meant charge instead of charge density.
Or current density instead of current?
 
  • Like
Likes tellmesomething
haruspex said:
Or current density instead of current?
Yes possible
 
Back
Top