How Do Charge Locations Affect Electric Field Calculations?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field at the origin due to three point charges: +2.5 microC at (-0.20m, 0.15m), -4.8 microC at (0.50m, -0.35m), and -6.3 microC at (-0.42m, -0.32m). The electric field contributions from each charge were computed using the formula E = (kq)/r², where k = 9 * 10^9. The initial calculations yielded Ex = 2.9 * 10^4 N/C and Ey = -2.7 * 10^5 N/C, but the correct values are Ex = 2.2 * 10^5 N/C and Ey = -4.1 * 10^5 N/C, indicating an error in angle calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Coulomb's Law and electric field calculations
  • Familiarity with coordinate geometry and vector components
  • Proficiency in arithmetic operations involving signed numbers
  • Knowledge of trigonometric functions for angle calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the application of Coulomb's Law in electric field calculations
  • Study vector addition and decomposition in two dimensions
  • Learn about the significance of angle measurement in physics problems
  • Practice problems involving multiple point charges and their electric fields
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, electrical engineers, and anyone interested in mastering electric field calculations involving multiple charges.

endeavor
Messages
174
Reaction score
0
"Three charges, +2.5 microC, -4.8microC, and -6.3microC, are located at (-0.20m, 0.15m), (0.50m, -0.35m), and (-0.42m, -0.32m) respectively. What is the electric field at the origin?"
Using the coordinates, I found that r12 = 0.0625 m2, r22 = 0.3725m2, and r32 = 0.2788m2. I then plugged that into the equation E = (kq)/r2, where k = 9 * 10^9.

Using that I found:
E1 = 3.6 * 10^5 N/C at 37º below the +x-axis.
E2 = 1.2 * 10^5 N/C at 35º above the -x-axis.
E3 = 2.0 * 10^5 N/C at 37º below the -x-axis.
Then the final components of the total Electric Field is:
Ex = 2.9 * 10^4 N/C
Ey = -2.7 * 10^5 N/C

However, the answer is 2.2 * 10^5 N/C for x, and -4.1 * 10^5 N/C for y. What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You problem solving approach looks correct.

Maybe you went wrong in the arithemtic (+/- signs)? Or perphaps you've not calculated the angles correctly?
 
siddharth said:
You problem solving approach looks correct.

Maybe you went wrong in the arithemtic (+/- signs)? Or perphaps you've not calculated the angles correctly?
It was the angles.
E2 should be = 1.2 * 10^5 N/C at 35º below the +x-axis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
19K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K