Magnetic field due to semi-circular wire

ks_wann
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
So, I've got a wire with a semicircle about the origin, my task is to find the magnetic field at M=(0,0,z).

I want to use Biot-Savart, so I find dl', r and r-hat. (r being the vector from the source point to field point)



\begin{equation}
r^{2}=R^{2}+z^{2}\\
\mathbf{r}=R\cos{\theta}\mathbf{\hat{i}}+R\sin{\theta}\mathbf{\hat{j}}+z\mathbf{\hat{k}}\\
d\mathbf{l^{\prime}}=Rd\theta \mathbf{\hat{\theta}}

\end{equation}

With these identified, I use biot-savart:

\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})=\frac{\mu_{0}I}{4\pi}\int\frac{d\mathbf{l^{ \prime}}\times\mathbf{\hat{r}}}{r^{2}}
\end{equation}


What troubles me is the cross product. I get

\begin{equation}
d\mathbf{l^{\prime}}\times\mathbf{\hat{r}}=\frac{R}{\sqrt{R^{2}+z^{2}}} \mathbf{\hat{\theta}}\times(R\cos\theta \mathbf{\hat{i}}+R\sin\theta \mathbf{\hat{j}}+z\mathbf{\hat{k}})
\end{equation},

and I'm not sure what to make of it as the unit vector would change all the way through the semicircle.
 

Attachments

  • Wire.jpg
    Wire.jpg
    3 KB · Views: 2,813
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a case where the angle between \vec{dl'} and \hat{r} is always the same so it is much better to simply use the right hand rule to find the direction and use dl' \, \sin \theta to find the magnitude. If you absolutely want to use a cross product, write instead \vec{dl'} as dl' \, \hat{\theta}.
 
Okay. So I basically just state that the field points downwards in the case of z=0, and get
\begin{equation} \frac{\mu_0I}{4\pi} \int_{\theta_{1}}^{\theta^{2}} \frac{R}{(R^2+z^2)^{3/2}} \sin{\theta} d \theta \end{equation}?

What about the change in direction with increasing z?
 
Consider a small segment of the wire of length ##d\vec l##, producing a small magnetic flux density ##d\vec B## at position ##\vec r## away from the wire.

Hint: what can you say about the direction of ##d\vec l## and ## \hat r##?

34q42ts.png


Also, expressing ##dl = R \space d\phi## will make your integral much easier. Exploit symmetries instead of diving straight into Cartesian cross products..
 
Last edited:
unscientific said:
Consider a small segment of the wire of length ##d\vec l##, producing a small magnetic flux density ##d\vec B## at position ##\vec r## away from the wire.

Hint: what can you say about the direction of ##d\vec l## and ## \hat r##?

Well, ##d\vec l ## and ##\hat r## are perpendicular at all times. I see that for a full circle, all the horizontal components will cancel, thus giving me ##B(z)##. Am I missing something?

I'm sadly not very good at identifying and exploiting symmetries..
 
ks_wann said:
Well, ##d\vec l ## and ##\hat r## are perpendicular at all times. I see that for a full circle, all the horizontal components will cancel, thus giving me ##B(z)##. Am I missing something?

I'm sadly not very good at identifying and exploiting symmetries..

Yes horizontal components cancel for a full circle, but not for a semi-cricle. Do the integration for horizontal and components separately.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top