Gauss's Law 2 concentric cylinders in electrostatic equilibrium

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around two concentric metallic hollow cylinders in electrostatic equilibrium, with specific charge densities and geometrical parameters. The participants explore the implications of these conditions on charge distribution and electric field calculations within the system.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the total charge on the inner surface of the larger cylinder and question the implications of electrostatic equilibrium. They discuss the relationship between charge density and total charge over a length, as well as the setup for calculating the electric field in the cavity between the cylinders.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on the interpretation of charge distribution and the application of Gauss's Law. There is an ongoing exploration of the correct approach to calculating the electric field, with multiple interpretations being discussed regarding the enclosed charge and the use of linear charge density.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding the definitions of charge density and the assumptions made about the system's geometry. There is recognition of the need for clarity in the problem statement regarding the nature of the charge densities involved.

shale
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Consider the cross sections of two, very long, concentric, metallic, hollow cylinders placed in a vacuum. The small cylinder has inner radius A and outer radius B while the larger cylinder has inner radius 2A and outer radius 2B. Initially the small and big hollow cylinders have charge densities of +2λ and -2λ respectively.

1) AT electrostatic equilibrium what is the total charge of the inner surface of the big cylinder if the cylinders both have e length L?

2) what is the electric field in tha cavity between the two cylinders? se r as the distance measured from the center of the spheres.

Homework Equations



relevant equations would be the flux which is EA=Qenco

The Attempt at a Solution



for number 1

since this is at electrostatic equilibrium, the net charge AT the CYLINDER is ZERO. therefore Qin=0... but inner cylinder has +2λL, and so the inner surface of the larger cylinder would be -2λL... and for the outside surface... (will it be +2λL for the net charge on the conductor to be zero.?? or there will be no charge because the said "net" charge in that conductor should be -2λL??) I'm confused...

and is it correct for me to multiply the charge densities to L??


for number 2

I set up an equation like this...

EA= E2πrL = ([2λ(πr2L)] - [-2λ(πR2L)]) /εo


we cancel and it becomes like this

E = [λπ(r2+R2)] /εor


where r is the outer radius of the smaller cylinder and R is inner radius of larger one.. i think I'm wasting my effort because all this is wrong :-ss please help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF. :smile:

shale said:

Homework Statement



Consider the cross sections of two, very long, concentric, metallic, hollow cylinders placed in a vacuum. The small cylinder has inner radius A and outer radius B while the larger cylinder has inner radius 2A and outer radius 2B. Initially the small and big hollow cylinders have charge densities of +2λ and -2λ respectively.

1) AT electrostatic equilibrium what is the total charge of the inner surface of the big cylinder if the cylinders both have e length L?

2) what is the electric field in tha cavity between the two cylinders? se r as the distance measured from the center of the spheres.

Homework Equations



relevant equations would be the flux which is EA=Qenco

The Attempt at a Solution



for number 1

since this is at electrostatic equilibrium, the net charge AT the CYLINDER is ZERO. therefore Qin=0... but inner cylinder has +2λL, and so the inner surface of the larger cylinder would be -2λL...
Yes.

and for the outside surface... (will it be +2λL for the net charge on the conductor to be zero.??
No, because the net charge on the outer conductor is NOT zero.

... or there will be no charge because the said "net" charge in that conductor should be -2λL??)
Yes. There is zero charge on the outer surface of the outer cylinder, for exactly the reason you said here.

i'm confused...

and is it correct for me to multiply the charge densities to L??

Yes, if you want to get the total charge in a length L of a cylinder.

for number 2

I set up an equation like this...

EA= E2πrL = ([2λ(πr2L)] - [-2λ(πR2L)]) /εo

Not quite, but you're not far off.

Think about the surface you are defining, and the fact that you need to use the charge enclosed by that surface here.

  • Does the surface contain the inner cylinder?
  • Does the surface contain the outer cylinder?

Based on the answers to those 2 questions, what is the charge enclosed within the surface?

we cancel and it becomes like this

E = [λπ(r2+R2)] /εor


where r is the outer radius of the smaller cylinder and R is inner radius of larger one.. i think I'm wasting my effort because all this is wrong :-ss please help.
 
Redbelly98 said:
Not quite, but you're not far off.

Think about the surface you are defining, and the fact that you need to use the charge enclosed by that surface here.

  • Does the surface contain the inner cylinder?
  • Does the surface contain the outer cylinder?


do mean the gaussian surface? ---- 1) Yes, and 2) No..

Redbelly98 said:
Based on the answers to those 2 questions, what is the charge enclosed within the surface? ?

so total charge enclosed is +2λL


should i still use EA=Qenco...? if so then...

EA= E2πrL = 2λL/εo

(I think I was wrong in my first attempt because i multiplied it to the volume and not the area, λ is always linear density right? because in this question it's not clearly stated)

E = λ/πrεo


is this one correct now? or is there a different approach on how this is solved? :-ss

THANKS FOR YOUR REPLY! I'm really glad someone responded.!
 
shale said:
do mean the gaussian surface?
Yes.
(I think I was wrong in my first attempt because i multiplied it to the volume and not the area, λ is always linear density right? because in this question it's not clearly stated)
I think so, but I didn't really think about that and just assumed that it was the linear density. You're right, it should be clearly stated.

E = λ/πrεo

is this one correct now? or is there a different approach on how this is solved? :-ss
Looks good! :smile:

THANKS FOR YOUR REPLY! I'm really glad someone responded.!

You're welcome.
 

Similar threads

Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K