Finding the B field in a long cylindrical hole in a long wire

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the magnetic field inside a cylindrical cavity within a cylindrical wire carrying a uniform electric current. The user initially attempts to find the vector potential by integrating over the entire cylinder and then subtracting the contribution from the cavity, leading to complex elliptic integrals. However, participants suggest that a simpler approach using Ampere's law would suffice, eliminating the need for the complicated vector potential calculations. The user acknowledges this feedback and realizes that their initial method was unnecessarily complicated. This highlights the importance of exploring simpler methods in electromagnetic problems.
VortexLattice
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
So, I'm trying this problem and just want to make sure my attack is correct. We have an infinitely long cylindrical hole in an infinitely long cylindrical wire, like in this picture:

11bca21b-9df4-47b5-8ce5-d451a1e43490.png


(Here, they call the radius of the hole 'a'. I'm going to call it r.)

There's an electric current I in the wire and the current density is uniform. I want to find the B field anywhere in the cavity. First, I find J, the current density:

J = \frac{I}{\pi (R^2 - r^2)}

So, the step I'm most worried about is this: I want to find the vector potential A in the hole, but it's pretty hard to integrate around a hole. So I'm going to find the vector potential due to the whole cylinder (as if there were no hole), and then the vector potential due to a current of the same density going through the hole, and then subtract the latter from the former (because it's just a superposition, like electric potential, right?).

I'm doing this in polar coordinates, where the z axis goes along the center of the wire. So, typically you have to integrate over a volume to get A, but we don't actually care about the z direction here, so we just integrate it from 0 to z, and it should cancel out at the end:

\vec{A}(\vec{x}) = Jz \int_0^R r'dr' \int_0^{2\pi} d\phi' \frac{1}{\left|\vec{x} - \vec{x'}\right|}

So, I say that our observation point \vec{x} is (x,0,z), and the point \vec{x'} we're integrating at is (x',y',z). Then, in polar coordinates, we have \vec{x'} = (r'cos(\phi'),r'sin(\phi'),z). Plugging this in, I get:


\vec{A}(\vec{x}) = Jz \int_0^R r'dr' \int_0^{2\pi} d\phi' \frac{1}{\sqrt{(x - r'cos(\phi'))^2 + (r'sin(\phi'))^2}} = Jz \int_0^R r'dr' \int_0^{2\pi} d\phi' \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2 -2xr'cos(\phi') + r'^2}}

Now, I integrate. I actually first integrate over r'. I do a kind of completing the square thing in the denominator, and then integrate:

\vec{A}(\vec{x}) = Jz \int_0^R r'dr' \int_0^{2\pi} d\phi' \frac{1}{\sqrt{(r' - cos(\phi'))^2 + x^2sin^2(\phi')}}

I integrated this in wolfram, and it simplifies a little. But now I have to integrate over phi, and it gives me an elliptic integral of the first kind. Academia has ruined me so I get afraid when an answer doesn't boil down to three terms or less, so I'm just wondering if this seems right or not.

Also, is my general idea a good one or is there a much easier way?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, it has been pointed out to me that I am functionally retarded: You use the premise I'm using (subtracting the current due to a cylinder in place of the hole), but you don't do the whole silliness with the vector potential. Because you're calculating them separately, you can just use Ampere's law. Yayyy, I'm stupid.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Back
Top