Gauss' Law using linear charge density

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on applying Gauss' Law to a problem involving a long, thin, nonconducting rod with a uniform linear charge density of 2.80 nC/m and a coaxial conducting cylindrical shell. The electric field at a distance of 16.0 cm from the axis of the shell is calculated to be 315 N/C using the formula E = λ / (2πε₀r). For determining the surface charge densities on the inner and outer surfaces of the shell, participants are advised to utilize Gauss' Law, noting that the net electric field inside the shell is zero due to its lack of net charge.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gauss' Law
  • Familiarity with electric fields and charge distributions
  • Knowledge of cylindrical coordinates
  • Proficiency in using the formula E = λ / (2πε₀r)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Gauss' Law for cylindrical symmetry
  • Learn how to calculate surface charge density from electric fields
  • Explore the implications of net charge on conductors in electrostatics
  • Investigate the behavior of electric fields inside and outside conductors
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of electric fields and charge distributions in cylindrical geometries.

catie1981
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A charge of uniform linear density 2.80 nC/m is distributed along a long, thin, nonconducting rod. The rod is coaxial with a long conducting cylindrical shell (inner radius = 5.20 cm, outer radius = 10.8 cm). The net charge on the shell is zero. (a) What is the magnitude (in N/C) of the electric field at distance r = 16.0 cm from the axis of the shell? What is the surface charge density on the (b) inner and (c) outer surface of the shell?


Homework Equations



E= lambda / (2pi epsilon r) I think...that's all

The Attempt at a Solution



I have the solution for part a) which I used the above formula to determine as 3.15e2 N/C. However, for parts b) and c), I am unsure as to whether I am to use that same formula, or if I'm supposed to use integral E*dA*cos(theta), and if so, would the value I determined from the first part be the E for the second formula? thanks! (I'm actually kinda lost on how to start the b & c parts...)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For b), try using Gauss's Law for the space inside the cylindrical shell.

HINT: What must the E-Field be equal to in that region?

Once you have done that, can you find the charge for c)?
 
does the fact that the net charge on the shell is zero have any real relevance to what I'm doing?
 
catie1981 said:
does the fact that the net charge on the shell is zero have any real relevance to what I'm doing?

Yes it does. What does this tell you about the charge on the outside of the shell if you know the charge on the inner wall?
 
they are opposites...
 
but I still don't know what I'm supposed to do with Gauss' Law here...I can't figure out what values are supposed to correspond to what, etc. *arrrghhh*
 
alright for the cylindrical shell, what form of Gauss' Law should I be using? is it

E = (rho*R^2)/(2*epsilon*r) and if it is, what is the difference between R and r?

And if not, arrrgh again! cause I don't know which one to use!
 
so this is apparently not the equation because no matter how I manipulate it, I'm not getting the answer...someone, please help...this is my last homework problem for this section...
 
oooo, I figured it out...how silly of me :)~
 
  • #10
catie1981 said:
oooo, I figured it out...how silly of me :)~

Sry, I got caught up with work today and didn't have time to check the forum. Otherwise I would have answered your questions.

Good Job!:approve:
 
  • #11
There is not net electric field in within the cylindrical shell and since it doesn't have a net charge either, you can simply use Gauss's Law in respect to the axis for the first one. For the 2nd and 3rd part...using Gauss's Law you can derive an equation for the electric field near the surface and you can use that to get your answer...what you'd be missing is the value for the electric field. At each point in the conductor, net E is 0N/C, so as you approach the surface, net E is still relatively 0N/C...but there is still a collective charge on the surface, so for net E to be 0, it has to produce an E equal to the external electric field. In this case, you don't have to worry whether you look at it inside or outside the conductor because you'll be dealing with distances supposedly infinitely close the surface.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
634
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K