Lorentz Force on a Curved Wire in a Non-Constant Magnetic Field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the Lorentz force on a curved current-carrying wire situated in a non-constant magnetic field. Participants explore the limitations of standard Lorentz force equations and seek to derive an appropriate integral formulation for this scenario, particularly in the context of homopolar motors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the assumption that the magnetic field ##\vec B## must be constant, suggesting that it can vary with position along the wire.
  • Another participant proposes expressing the differential force as ##d\vec F = \vec B \times d\vec l## and integrating it along the wire to find the total force.
  • A participant points out the omission of the current term ##I## in the expression for the differential force and discusses the complexity introduced by the cross product in the integration process.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the correct expression for the differential force, emphasizing the need to integrate along the length of the wire and the importance of knowing the magnetic field at each point.
  • There is a reference to Ampère's Law and its relation to the discussion, although some participants express uncertainty about its applicability to the Lorentz force context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the assumptions regarding the magnetic field and the appropriate methods for integrating to find the Lorentz force. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing approaches and interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity introduced by the cross product in the integration process and the need for careful consideration of the wire's geometry and the magnetic field's variation along its length.

CarsonAdams
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
What is the formula to evaluate Lorentz force on a curved current carrying wire in a non-constant magnetic field (given by some known vector field). The standard form of Lorentz force (Fb=BxlI) when B and the wire's length 'l' are constants does not account for this case, nor does the differential form of the equation when the wire can be curved but the magnetic force must be constant (dFb=(Bxdl)I).

For example, if B is being generated by a simplified dipole and the curve is being generated by some parameterized function, what integral describes the force exerted on the wire? (This is shown below with the wire being a circular loop centered on the dipole. Though this is possibly a trivially symmetrical case that evaluates to zero, its still worth considering.)

My initial guess is that such an evaluation needs to be done using some sort of line integral or at least a double integral, but the cross product throws the whole thing off for me. Suggestions or known properties?

(This is in conjunction with an effort to create a quantitative analysis of homopolar motors, two of which with slightly different parameters and properties from the above question are shown below)
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-03-15 at 5.59.06 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-03-15 at 5.59.06 PM.png
    64.9 KB · Views: 684
  • images-1.jpeg
    images-1.jpeg
    4.3 KB · Views: 576
  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    11.6 KB · Views: 791
Physics news on Phys.org
CarsonAdams said:
The standard form of Lorentz force (Fb=BxlI) when B and the wire's length 'l' are constants does not account for this case, nor does the differential form of the equation when the wire can be curved but the magnetic force must be constant (dFb=(Bxdl)I).

Why do you think ##\vec B## has to be constant? (I assume you mean "constant with respect to position", i.e. "uniform")

Find some way to express ##d\vec F = \vec B \times d\vec l## as a function of position along the wire, then integrate that. In your examples, it looks like ##d\vec F## is always into or out of the paper so you can call it positive or negative accordingly.

If the wire forms a closed loop, and the net current "piercing" the loop is zero, and the net flux of ##\vec E## through the loop is constant, then the answer turns out to be very simple. See Ampère's Law in integral form.
 
Last edited:
You've forgotten the current term I in your expression for dF. It would seem that ##d\vec F = I (d\vec B \times d\vec l)## would yield the infinitesimal value of F at every point. In order to solve, can I simply take the double integral of the R.H.S. with respect to each variable? or do I first need to map one function into the other to take the integral? Again, the cross product also adds a layer of complexity in order to sum.

Your final statement that "If the wire forms a closed loop, and the net current "piercing" the loop is zero, and the net flux of E⃗ through the loop is constant, then the answer turns out to be very simple. See Ampère's Law in integral form." is true, however, I don't see how it applies to Lorentz force as it only utilizes dot products and doesn't explicitly describe forces, only the magnetic fields due to currents or vice versa...
 
Oops, you're right, I left out the I. It should be ##d\vec F = I(\vec B \times d\vec l)##. It's ##\vec B##, not ##d\vec B##. ##\vec B## is the magnetic field at the point where the infinitesimal wire segment ##d\vec l## is located. You're integrating only along the length of the wire.

You may be confusing this with problems where you find the ##\vec B## at a point, produced by a current-carrying wire with some shape, by integrating the contributions ##d\vec B## from each segment ##d\vec l## of the "source wire." Here, you already know ##\vec B## at each point, either because you've measured it, or you've calculated it from the properties of the source.

The current is the same everywhere along the wire that the force is being exerted on, so if the wire is a closed loop, then
$$\vec F = \int {d\vec F} = I \oint {\vec B \times d\vec l}$$
You're right, Ampère's Law involves the dot product ##\vec B \cdot d\vec l## instead. Brain fart. :blushing:

Exactly what you use for ##d\vec l## depends on the symmetry of the problem. If the loop is a rectangular one, you might want to use ##d\vec l = \hat x dx + \hat y dy + \hat z dz## and align the loop along the coordinate axes. For spherical symmetry and a circular loop, look up the equivalent expression for ##d\vec l## in terms of ##\hat r##, ##\hat \theta## and ##\hat \phi##. Whichever one you use, express ##\vec B## using the same coordinate system.
 
Last edited:
CarsonAdams said:
What is the formula to evaluate Lorentz force on a curved current carrying wire in a non-constant magnetic field (given by some known vector field). The standard form of Lorentz force (Fb=BxlI) when B and the wire's length 'l' are constants does not account for this case, nor does the differential form of the equation when the wire can be curved but the magnetic force must be constant (dFb=(Bxdl)I).

For example, if B is being generated by a simplified dipole and the curve is being generated by some parameterized function, what integral describes the force exerted on the wire? (This is shown below with the wire being a circular loop centered on the dipole. Though this is possibly a trivially symmetrical case that evaluates to zero, its still worth considering.)

My initial guess is that such an evaluation needs to be done using some sort of line integral or at least a double integral, but the cross product throws the whole thing off for me. Suggestions or known properties?

(This is in conjunction with an effort to create a quantitative analysis of homopolar motors, two of which with slightly different parameters and properties from the above question are shown below)

I think this will help you.

\mathtt{F\ =\ \ BILsin\theta}

http://www.xtremepapers.com/revision/a-level/physics/electromagnetism.php
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K