How Fast Does an Electrical Impulse Travel in a Copper Wire?

[snorkack]

hard to answer your question exactly as it depends on many parameters (is the wire part of a transmission line like a coaxial cable, is it over good conducting ground e.t.c), but i believe a good approximation is that the other end will be at 110kv in time approximately equal to $\frac{5\cdot 10^6}{3\cdot 10^8}$ because we know that in wires the voltage waves travel at about the speed of light.

It´ s a bad approximation precisely because the waves necessarily travel slower. The question is how much slower? And does it travel as a "wave"? If it starts at one end of wire as a jump when switch is closed, does it arrive at other end in the same shape, or as a completely different shaped disturbance? In which case you cannot even define a specific speed.

 

[Delta2]

yes ok, if it is part of a coax with dielectric then it travels slower, you also start talking about dispersion, ok.

 

[snorkack]

There might not be a dielectric in the coaxial cable itself. But because of the 1/r divergence of electric field which only integrates as ln r, to which place does the capacitance of the wire go? To infinity 5000 km away (order of magnitude of total wire length) or just to dielectric ground 10 m beneath the wire?

 

[anorlunda]

It´ s a bad approximation precisely because the waves necessarily travel slower. The question is how much slower? And does it travel as a "wave"? If it starts at one end of wire as a jump when switch is closed, does it arrive at other end in the same shape, or as a completely different shaped disturbance? In which case you cannot even define a specific speed.

We study that in power systems where the wires are very long. Switching surge is one case. Lightning strikes are another. Every study depends critically on the design parameters of the line.

The speed of propagation depends on the line parameters.

The shape of the pulses are greatly distorted as they travel.

There are many nonlinear effects, one of which is lightning arrestors.

It is hard to be more specific because every real case depends on the parameters.

 

[jartsa]

Actually it is the speed of magnets that is slow. The speed of their interaction is equal to the speed of light.

We have EM waves produced by this arrangement of magnets too, only that the frequency of those waves is really small, approximately equal to the frequency of the mechanical oscillation of the magnets (they oscillate like a system of coupled simple pendulums ), that is a few Hz I believe.

It seems to me that those magnets move quite fast, much faster than electrons in a wire.

If we made the magnets trillion times stronger, and also gravity would be that much stronger, then the signal would move much faster through the line of magnets. I trust that J.C. Maxwell could calculate that speed, and it would be close to c.

If we wanted to make electric wire to be more like that series of magnets, we should make all segments of wire to have less charge. Which we can do by making the 'wire' to be a vacuum tube.

If we make the amount of charges in the 'wire' small enough, then a normal power source can make the charges move like the magnets in the video, or faster. The mass of electron would be important in that case.

 

[Byron Forbes]

2 questions to all atm.

1. Is the implication here that current is produced due to an EM wave and that the notion of 2 electrons becoming closer to each other, thus pushing each other harder (force of repulsion of the respective electric fields) plays absolutely no role in the production of current?

2. If electrons weighed more, would the speed of electricity in a wire be less?

A few other notes -

The idea that an E field is set up immediately all around the wire is wrong. If that was the case then there would be no such thing as signal speed.

The implication that there is an EM wave dictating everything seems weird. It's as if it is being suggested that this wave comes first and then the current results from that rather than the other way around! What if the entire current began with a capacitor for example - clearly that would be a case of electron movement first and then everything following on from that, wouldn't it?

 

[snorkack]

If we make the amount of charges in the 'wire' small enough, then a normal power source can make the charges move like the magnets in the video, or faster. The mass of electron would be important in that case.

I am not sure it directly enters into computations.
You could transmit electricity via a metallic conductor, like a copper wire wrapped in rubber insulator, where electrons are charge carriers and move. Or you could transmit electricity through nonmetallic conductor, like the same rubber hose containing not metal copper wire, but aqueous solution of copper sulphate. In which electrons cannot move, and charge carriers are copper cations of far bigger mass. When you measure travel time of switching surges and lightning surges, does the mass of charge carrier enter directly into equations?

 

[anorlunda]

When you measure travel time of switching surges and lightning surges, does the mass of charge carrier enter directly into equations?

The constants $\mu_0$ and $\epsilon_0$ in Maxwell's Equations that govern the propagation.

For a mechanical motion model of conduction that does include mass (but not propagation of the field), see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drude_model

 

[snorkack]

The constants $\mu_0$ and $\epsilon_0$ in Maxwell's Equations that govern the propagation.

Maxwell equations are inapplicable. No 0 here, because no vacuum, nothing constant about μ or ε in terms of location or direction.

 

[anorlunda]

The values of μ or ε are different in different media. Maxwell's Equations apply everywhere.

 

[nsaspook]

The implication that there is an EM wave dictating everything seems weird. It's as if it is being suggested that this wave comes first and then the current results from that rather than the other way around! What if the entire current began with a capacitor for example - clearly that would be a case of electron movement first and then everything following on from that, wouldn't it?

First it should be clear that electricity (physics meaning) refers to the movement of charge carriers not the electrical (electromagnetic) energy as they are measured in two separate terms.

The implication is see in some is that the EM wave and good conductor electron movements are somehow separate events in this wiring circuit. They are a system/synergy, a wave-guide for electrical energy that usually also imparts (electrical energy is transformed) a small amount of kinetic energy to the charge carriers that's usually wasted as heat called resistance. This guided by conductors near-field EM field/wave can be mostly reactive, closely coupled to the conductors, sources and currents instead of a typical far-field EM wave that mainly exists uncoupled from the sources and currents as it propagates.

 

[snorkack]

A conductor does not seem to even have ε. Because, in long term, there will be no electric field in the conductor. In short term, there is, because inductivity and resistivity will resist the currents that tend to destroy the electric field.

 

[Byron Forbes]

Here's an attempt to bring this discussion back into focus.

Consider a power supply (PS) connected to a loop of wire - basically, out of one terminal, electrons are pushed out, and in the other they are allowed in. This current is not immediately observed all around the wire. The electrons in the vicinity of the PS are moving very shortly after turning the PS on. But the electrons in the wire far from the PS are yet to begin moving. They will begin to move when the process, whatever it is, reaches them. How long it takes to reach them is dictated by "The speed of Electricity", or the alternative expression, "Signal speed".

As is obvious, this process will proceed around the wire in either direction and meet half way along the wire. In a typical DC circuit, shortly after this event, assuming we continued to apply a steady electric field at our PS, we'd end up with a steady DC current.

Now let's consider a point on the wire 1/4 of the way around where the electrons are headed toward us from the PS. At a point in time, dictated by the speed of electricity in this particular wire, we would see an electron that has just begun to move alongside an electron that has yet to move. So the main question this thread is asking, is why and how does the stationary electron begin to move.

My assertion is that it's exactly the same as a longitudinal wave, like a sound wave in water or air, traveling through the electrons. So the moving electron becomes closer to the stationary one, the force of repulsion between them increases as a result, and so now the stationary electron accelerates away from it. Then we move to the next electron in line, and so on and so forth, all around the wire.

But this apparently is not the right thinking. In fact, it seems to be suggested that the forces of repulsion between the electrons plays absolutely no roll in this process at all. This makes no sense to me at all!

 

[davenn]

Consider a power supply (PS) connected to a loop of wire - basically, out of one terminal, electrons are pushed out, and in the other they are allowed in. This current is not immediately observed all around the wire. The electrons in the vicinity of the PS are moving very shortly after turning the PS on. But the electrons in the wire far from the PS are yet to begin moving. They will begin to move when the process, whatever it is, reaches them. How long it takes to reach them is dictated by "The speed of Electricity", or the alternative expression, "Signal speed".

Serious mis-conseptions in there

As is obvious, this process will proceed around the wire in either direction and meet half way along the wire. In a typical DC circuit, shortly after this event, assuming we continued to apply a steady electric field at our PS, we'd end up with a steady DC current.

Absolutely NOT, completely incorrect

Now let's consider a point on the wire 1/4 of the way around where the electrons are headed toward us from the PS. At a point in time, dictated by the speed of electricity in this particular wire, we would see an electron that has just begun to move alongside an electron that has yet to move. So the main question this thread is asking, is why and how does the stationary electron begin to move.

OK, what you haven't seemed to have picked up yet is that it's the electric field propagating around the circuit, on the OUTSIDE of the wire,
at a bit less than c, that "drives" the electrons/charge carrier movement through the wire.
As some one mentioned, way back, early on page one of this thread, If the electric field didn't propagate at something close to the speed of light, then the light globe 1/2 way ( or where-ever) around the circuit wouldn't switch on so quickly after power was applied to the circuit.

Electrons/charge carriers WILL start moving under the influence of the electric field as soon as the field reaches them.
Again, as has been said several times, electron velocity IN the wire is VERY slow, ~ 1 to 2 mm/sec, compared to the substantially higher
velocity of the electric field around the outside of the wire.
So The light globe is initially lit, by the electrons that are present in the filament ( at rest/ t=0) and start moving when the electric field reaches them.

Whether the electrons are pushed, dragged (or something else) into motion by the electric field, I am not sure.
@Dale or one of our other senior dudes can probably answer that ?

Dave

 

[Delta2]

Here's an attempt to bring this discussion back into focus.

Consider a power supply (PS) connected to a loop of wire - basically, out of one terminal, electrons are pushed out, and in the other they are allowed in. This current is not immediately observed all around the wire. The electrons in the vicinity of the PS are moving very shortly after turning the PS on. But the electrons in the wire far from the PS are yet to begin moving. They will begin to move when the process, whatever it is, reaches them. How long it takes to reach them is dictated by "The speed of Electricity", or the alternative expression, "Signal speed".

As is obvious, this process will proceed around the wire in either direction and meet half way along the wire. In a typical DC circuit, shortly after this event, assuming we continued to apply a steady electric field at our PS, we'd end up with a steady DC current.

Now let's consider a point on the wire 1/4 of the way around where the electrons are headed toward us from the PS. At a point in time, dictated by the speed of electricity in this particular wire, we would see an electron that has just begun to move alongside an electron that has yet to move. So the main question this thread is asking, is why and how does the stationary electron begin to move.

My assertion is that it's exactly the same as a longitudinal wave, like a sound wave in water or air, traveling through the electrons. So the moving electron becomes closer to the stationary one, the force of repulsion between them increases as a result, and so now the stationary electron accelerates away from it. Then we move to the next electron in line, and so on and so forth, all around the wire.

But this apparently is not the right thinking. In fact, it seems to be suggested that the forces of repulsion between the electrons plays absolutely no roll in this process at all. This makes no sense to me at all!

I can't find exactly where the flaw is with this microscopic electromechanical model (each electron moves and its movement signals the nearby electrons).

However we know by transmission line theory wave equations that the voltage and current in a transmission line constitute waves that travel at a speed that is a significant fraction of speed of light (66%-99% of speed of light) and these equations are known from Olivier Heaviside back at 1885, he developed them starting from Maxwell's equations, without the knowledge of this underlying microscopic model of electrons about 15 years before the electron was discovered.

 

[jartsa]

So the main question this thread is asking, is why and how does the stationary electron begin to move.

Well I guess the electric fields of other electrons is the reason why the stationary electron starts to move.

If we study the electric field outside the wire, first we notice that it exists, and it has energy. Well, that's because the electrons 'inside' the wire exist outside the wire too, I mean their fields stick out of the wire.

What I'm saying is that the energy of the pressure wave traveling through a wire is mostly outside the wire.

You see, I'm trying to combine the two apparently disagreeing ideas here, the idea of an EM-wave outside the wire, and the idea of a pressure wave inside the wire.

 

[Dale]

As is obvious, this process will proceed around the wire in either direction and meet half way along the wire.

Absolutely NOT, completely incorrect

Well, I am kind of in between here. It is not guaranteed to happen that way, but there are circumstances where it could happen that way, so I don’t think that either “obvious” or “completely incorrect” is quite right. Since it could happen that way and since this is the OP’s thread I think we should go ahead and consider such a scenario, remembering that it is only one of several possible scenarios.

So the main question this thread is asking, is why and how does the stationary electron begin to move.

That is easy and clear. It moves when the E-field exerts a force on it.

I think that your actual question is where that E-field comes from? Is it due simply to Coulomb repulsion or is it due to waves outside the wire?

Coulomb repulsion is Gauss’ law, and Gauss’ law is an essential part of Maxwell’s equations. So the Coulomb repulsion is certainly part of the explanation.

However, Gauss’ law by itself is insufficient to explain a dynamic scenario with time varying E and B fields. That requires all four of Maxwell’s equations. So Gauss’ law is indeed an essential part of the explanation, it is just not the whole explanation by itself.

 

[davenn]

, but there are circumstances where it could happen that way,

ohhh ? being which ?
in all my years on here and other physics teaching, never heard of electrons traveling both
directions and meeting in the middle ?

They can change direction as with AC, but traveling in opposite directions at the same time and meeting in the middle ?

 

[Dale]

ohhh ? being which ?
in all my years on here and other physics teaching, never heard of electrons traveling both
directions and meeting in the middle ?

That isn’t what he said. He said electrons being pushed out of one terminal and allowed into the other terminal. So what he is describing is a scenario where current is going in one terminal and out the other while there is still no current in the far part of the loop.

That can happen eg when a large loop starts at 0 V for a long time and then the positive terminal is stepped up to 5 V and the negative terminal is stepped down to -5 V

 

[davenn]

That isn’t what he said. He said electrons being pushed out of one terminal and allowed into the other terminal.

ummmm not really, he said ...

As is obvious, this process will proceed around the wire in either direction and meet half way along the wire. In a typical DC circuit, shortly after this event, assuming we continued to apply a steady electric field at our PS, we'd end up with a steady DC current.

Nothing meets in the middle ( half way along), but regardless ... he had the idea not quite right as he doesn't realize how quickly the E field propagates around a circuit ...

The electrons in the vicinity of the PS are moving very shortly after turning the PS on. But the electrons in the wire far from the PS are yet to begin moving. They will begin to move when the process, whatever it is, reaches them. How long it takes to reach them is dictated by "The speed of Electricity", or the alternative expression, "Signal speed".

As the electrons/charge carriers start moving as soon as they are influenced by the electric field, which for anything other than longer transmission lines is just short of instantaneous and not delayed as much as what he thinks. That is, when he flicks the light switch on at home, the light comes on from a human observational ( non-instrument measured) point-of-view "instantaneously"

 

[Dale]

ummmm not really, he said ...

You have to look at the previous paragraph to see what he means by “this process”. His “this process” is not electrons moving both directions and meeting in the middle. He never says that.

Nothing meets in the middle ( half way along)

Waves propagating from both terminals certainly can meet in the middle, depending on the geometry and the setup.

 

[davenn]

You have to look at the previous paragraph to see what he means by “this process”. His “this process” is not electrons moving both directions and meeting in the middle. He never says that.

Yes he does, he's clearly refers to electrons

Consider a power supply (PS) connected to a loop of wire - basically, out of one terminal, electrons are pushed out, and in the other they are allowed in. This current is not immediately observed all around the wire. The electrons in the vicinity of the PS are moving very shortly after turning the PS on. But the electrons in the wire far from the PS are yet to begin moving. They will begin to move when the process, whatever it is, reaches them. How long it takes to reach them is dictated by "The speed of Electricity", or the alternative expression, "Signal speed".

 

[snorkack]

However we know by transmission line theory wave equations that the voltage and current in a transmission line constitute waves that travel at a speed that is a significant fraction of speed of light (66%-99% of speed of light) and these equations are known from Olivier Heaviside back at 1885, he developed them starting from Maxwell's equations, without the knowledge of this underlying microscopic model of electrons about 15 years before the electron was discovered.

Because they don´ t depend on whether the charge carriers in wire are electrons, holes or heavy ions?

But with instruments, speed of electricity is clearly not instant.

Water notoriously has ε as much as 81 (and 87 at 0 degrees).
When you try to send a telegram, or a ping, to the opposite side of Earth, like New Zealand to Spain, does your ping travel in direct line? That would be 43 ms. Through Earth core. Or does it travel around Earth? 67 ms at speed of light. Or does it follow the detours of cables under sea?
And at what speed? Since water has ε of 81, does the polarization of the sea around your ping traveling along cable (inside insulation) slow it down to 1/9 speed of light?

 

[tech99]

The idea that an E field is set up immediately all around the wire is wrong. If that was the case then there would be no such thing as signal speed.

The implication that there is an EM wave dictating everything seems weird. It's as if it is being suggested that this wave comes first and then the current results from that rather than the other way around! What if the entire current began with a capacitor for example - clearly that would be a case of electron movement first and then everything following on from that, wouldn't it?

Yes I agree with htis statement. To clarify my own thinking slightly, I imagine a wire spaced a long way from other conductors. I charge up an object such as a sphere and touch the end of the wire with it. Now we have a step impulse applied to the line, causing the first electrons to move and create magnetic fields surrounding the wire. As these first electrons move towards other electrons, we see repulsion and so on. As time goes on, the high frequency components of this discharge decay and we see progressively lower frequencies being launched until at last we approach the DC conditions. I would expect the initial high frequency electron movement to be at the surface, progressively getting deeper into the wire as the frequency falls, until near DC the entire wire carries the current. This propagation into the wire is by another slow EM wave which travels radially inwards.
If there is another wire nearby, then there is increased capacitance, so the electrons store their energy at a lower potential ie more spaced out. Now we are seeing a transverse component of electric field.
For a case where we have two wires forming a circuit, a battery and a switch, the initial impulse starts not from the battery but from the switch. I visualise that we have waves starting from each switch terminal and having opposite phase. These then travel around and around the circuit in opposite directions until Ohmic losses absorb them.
The EM radiation from a short wire terminated with resistance is broadside to the wire. This supports the view that the acceleration of the electrons is longitudinal.

 

[Delta2]

Because they don´ t depend on whether the charge carriers in wire are electrons, holes or heavy ions?

I think the speed of the waves doesn't depend on the exact nature of the charge carriers as long as the geometry of the transmission line remains the same (and ofcourse any dielectrics or magnetic permeability materials remain the same).

EDIT : I think after all that the charge carriers affect the parameter R of the transmission line, that is the ohmic resistance per unit length, which in turn affects the speed of waves. I had in my mind the lossless transmission line when I wrote the first paragraph if this post.

 

[Byron Forbes]

I think that your actual question is where that E-field comes from? Is it due simply to Coulomb repulsion or is it due to waves outside the wire?

Exactly!

And in fact, I am asking if there is any difference at all?

I am not even sure what the source of this EM wave is!

If the wave is a product of electron movement in the first place, then surely if an electron moves near another, then it's electric field will have a greater, if not absolute effect, on the nearby electron, since any effect of an EM wave is the product of the initial electron's movement in the first place.

I will now reply to an earlier post that has relevance here.

 

[Byron Forbes]

It sounds like the OP is visualizing the EM wavefront to be analogous to a sound wavefront. Sound propagates only via particle collisions. But when an electron moves, its field changes with infinite extent and the change propagates at speed c in a vacuum. So when the first electron moves, that pushes all the other electrons in the wire (after propagating the EM field), not just the ones immediately in front. That makes electrons unlike gaseous neutral particles.

What you have stated about electrons and their field (to infinity) holds true in both circumstances.

In either case, conductor or particle, you have electrons interspersed with nuclei (protons) which greatly neutralises everything at a distance rendering the infinite reach of fields as negligible. The only thing worth considering is the nearby particles i.e. the ones with no other particles between them.

Again, I see the idea of the initial signal "wavefront" as a longitudinal wave through the electrons.

 

[Byron Forbes]

Yes he does, he's clearly refers to electrons

Let me expand.

The only reason I even mentioned this was to avoid the situation where I'm looking at an electron yet to move, but if it was more than halfway around the wire from the terminal I was talking about then it would have already been effected by the other terminal. It was also an attempt to show that the electric field is not immediately set up all around the wire instantly when the PS is turned on.

To expand, at the PS we have an E field acting across the wiring that's within the PS. So when the PS is turned on, it pushed electrons out of one terminal, therefore at the other terminal we have an electron vacuum. Since the electron pressure in the wire at this other terminal is now greater than at the terminal, electrons flow into it.

So we now have 2 signals traveling from both terminals that will meet at the halfway point of the wire.

 

[fluidistic]

https://www.bpa.gov/news/newsroom/Pages/Hitch-a-slow-ride-on-the-Electron-Express.aspx

I am not quite convinced. If we assume that the free (or nearly free) electron model holds, then the electrons are fermions which are indistinguishable and delocalized. The ones responsible for electric conduction move at speeds comparable to about 1/100 th of c (i.e. at Fermi velocity).

 

[Byron Forbes]