Magnetic Force on current-carrying wire

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the magnetic force on a current-carrying wire moving through a uniform magnetic field. The Lorentz Force Law is referenced, with emphasis on the relationship between current, velocity, and the induced electromotive force (emf) due to the wire's motion. Participants express confusion about how the wire's length and movement affect the force calculation, particularly when the wire is perpendicular to the magnetic field. The conversation highlights the need for clarity on the derivation and the interplay between the wire's velocity and the charge carriers' movement within it. Overall, the discussion suggests further exploration of exercises involving wires in magnetic fields to enhance understanding.
fonz
Messages
151
Reaction score
5
Not necessarily a homework question but this is pretty fundamental. I can't get a decent derivation online.

If the length of the wire in the uniform magnetic field is l and it moves a distance \delta s in \delta t:

From the Lorentz Force Law:

\vec{F} = q\vec{v}\times\vec{B}

if flux is cut at \frac{\pi}{2}:

\vec{F} = q\vec{v}\vec{B}

\vec{v} = \frac{d\vec{s}}{dt}, q = \int I dt

\vec{F} = \vec{B}\frac{d\vec{s}}{dt} \int I dt

That is about as far as I get, not sure how the length of the conductor l comes into it?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Let us try to get the question right: The force you want to calculate is the force on a current-carrying wire. (This is what I read in the title). But then the wire moves a distance ##\delta\,\vec s##, so more is happening ?

"If the flux is cut at ##\pi\over 2##" means what ? The wire is perpendicular to ##\vec B##, ##\delta\,\vec s## is perpendicular to both ?

Can I see a drawing ?

You are apparently not happy with this derivation ? Isn't it sufficient to adjust the ##\vec v## vector for the case the wire isn't stationary ?
 
BvU said:
Let us try to get the question right: The force you want to calculate is the force on a current-carrying wire. (This is what I read in the title). But then the wire moves a distance ##\delta\,\vec s##, so more is happening ?

"If the flux is cut at ##\pi\over 2##" means what ? The wire is perpendicular to ##\vec B##, ##\delta\,\vec s## is perpendicular to both ?

Can I see a drawing ?

You are apparently not happy with this derivation ? Isn't it sufficient to adjust the ##\vec v## vector for the case the wire isn't stationary ?

Thank you for your response.

Unfortunately I don't have a diagram, you are correct in your statement that the wire in this example is perpendicular to both the uniform magnetic field and the velocity vector.

I don't really follow the context of that particular derivation you have referred to. I suppose if I were to describe the problem qualitatively the question I am asking is what is the relation between current and velocity for a wire moving through a uniform magnetic field.

Maybe I am slightly off track. I find the concept of the induced emf due to the flux linkage relatively easy to grasp. I am now asking what is the relation to current?
 
Yes, but everything can be brought back to the Lorentz force: Induced emf is a ##\vec v## of the charge carriers in a conductor, a wire in this case, due to the wire itself moving. Force on a current-carrying wire is a ##\vec v## of the charge carriers moving within the wire.

My impression was you do not necessarily want to dig into the case of a combination of the two, but I could be wrong, however:
the question I am asking is what is the relation between current and velocity for a wire moving through a uniform magnetic field
tells me otherwise.

Are you comfortable with the q v = q L/t = q/t L = I L steps in the derivation ?

The effect of the v from moving the wire simply adds (vector wise) to the effect of the movement
within the wire.

Suppose the wire is moving downward in their picture, then all I can think of is that the red velocity vector rotates a bit clockwise (with the component along the wire remaining the same magnitude). And with that rotation, the F vector also rotates by the same amount, thus pushing the charge carriers a bit towards the right end of the wire. I can't do much in the sense of physics with that, however: bringing about a current I in the wire has become a little easier. But we don't look at external stuff like a current source or so.

I think it would be wise to move on to further exercises with wire frames moving through zones with a magnetic field and such. Perhaps the links in the link also provide some insight.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top