Non ideal parallel plates (really quick question)

FrogPad
Messages
801
Reaction score
0
I'm writing a report about using numerical techniques to solve a simple parallel plates capacitor problem.

Would it be proper to say that there is no closed form solution to Lapalces equation when dealing with fringing effects? Isn't this the reason why we use numerical techniques to solve the problem?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
well in an idealized model, you can get closed form solutions for some fringing effects. However, i think it would be fair to say that you can't analytically solve for the fringing effects of any physical capacitor since there would be imperfections in the manufacturing process that would make it impractical, if not impossible, to get an exact solution for the potential even considering only classical electrodynamics.
 
FrogPad said:
I'm writing a report about using numerical techniques to solve a simple parallel plates capacitor problem.

Would it be proper to say that there is no closed form solution to Lapalces equation when dealing with fringing effects? Isn't this the reason why we use numerical techniques to solve the problem?
Conformal mapping can be used. I think that Panofsky and Phillips does it.
 
Meir Achuz said:
Conformal mapping can be used. I think that Panofsky and Phillips does it.


So I really shouldn't say that there is no closed form solution. This is just for an introductory emag engineering class, so I don't want to say things I don't know ;)
 
Sorry, I was too optomistic. I looked at P & P, and they do not do the fringing case. They just treat simpler cases. I donn't think conformal mapping can do the parallel plate frilnging. Get on with your numerical work.
 
Meir Achuz said:
Get on with your numerical work.

hehe, ok man.

Well I got that part done at least. Thanks for checking around.
 
Hi, I had an exam and I completely messed up a problem. Especially one part which was necessary for the rest of the problem. Basically, I have a wormhole metric: $$(ds)^2 = -(dt)^2 + (dr)^2 + (r^2 + b^2)( (d\theta)^2 + sin^2 \theta (d\phi)^2 )$$ Where ##b=1## with an orbit only in the equatorial plane. We also know from the question that the orbit must satisfy this relationship: $$\varepsilon = \frac{1}{2} (\frac{dr}{d\tau})^2 + V_{eff}(r)$$ Ultimately, I was tasked to find the initial...
The value of H equals ## 10^{3}## in natural units, According to : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units, ## t \sim 10^{-21} sec = 10^{21} Hz ##, and since ## \text{GeV} \sim 10^{24} \text{Hz } ##, ## GeV \sim 10^{24} \times 10^{-21} = 10^3 ## in natural units. So is this conversion correct? Also in the above formula, can I convert H to that natural units , since it’s a constant, while keeping k in Hz ?
Back
Top