Magnetic flux outside cylindrical conductor

mmh37
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone,

I have failed to show that the magnetic flux outside a cylindrical conductor is zero.

The problem goes like this:

a coaxial cable consists of a solid inner cylindrical conductor of radius a and an outer cylindrical conductor of inner and outer radius b and c. Distributed currents of equal magnitude I flow in opposite directions in the two conductors. Derive expressions for the magnetic flux density B(r) for each of these regions

1) 0<r <a

by amperes law I showed: B = \frac {K *l*r} {2*pi*a^2}

where K is the permeability of free space, don't know how to write that with latex

2) a<r<b

again by amperes law: B = \frac {K *l} {2*pi*r}

3) b<r<c

again by amperes law: B = \frac {K *l*(r^2-b^2)} {2*pi*r*(c^2-b^2)}

4) c<r

I got stuck here, surely it must be zero...but how can that be shown?

thanks for your help - it's very much appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With the coaxial cable coming out of the paper at you, draw a circular closed path around the outside of it.

INTEG[B dot dL] around that closed path = mu * I(enclosed)

The total I enclosed by the circle is zero, since the current up the inner conductor is the same as the current down the outer conductor, so B (or H) has to be identically zero everywhere outside the coax.


Edit -- BTW, check your answer for (3). When r=c, you should get zero for H.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Berkeman - that's explained it and it's very much appreciated! :-) As for the third one it surely has to be (c^2-r^2)/(c^2-b^2)
 
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