Parallel Disk Capacitor E field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric field strength at the midpoint between two charged disks with a diameter of 2.4 cm and a separation of 1.9 mm. The initial calculation yielded an electric field of 3 x 10^6 N/C, but the correct answer is 2.7 x 10^6 N/C. Participants suggest that the discrepancy arises from not using the precise formula for disks instead of approximating them as infinite sheets of charge. One participant mentions that using the correct formula yields a result of 2.8 x 10^6 N/C, indicating that the method of calculation significantly affects the outcome. Understanding the difference in formulas is crucial for accurate results in this context.
PhysKid45
Messages
12
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Two 2.4-cm-diameter disks face each other, 1.9 mm apart. They are charged to ± 12 nC .
What is the electric field strength at the midpoint between the centers of the disks?

Homework Equations


ppcap5.gif


The Attempt at a Solution


Q=12*10^-9
A= Pi * r^2 = pi*(.012)^2
Q/A= (12*10^-9)/(pi*(.012)^2)
E=(Q/A)/epsilon naught (8.85*10^-12)
E= 3*10^6

I am not sure where I go wrong, but I have one attempt left and keep getting the same answer

[Edit] answer: 2.7*10^6 but I would appreciate if someone could explain why
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
PhysKid45 said:

Homework Statement


Two 2.4-cm-diameter disks face each other, 1.9 mm apart. They are charged to ± 12 nC .
What is the electric field strength at the midpoint between the centers of the disks?

Homework Equations


ppcap5.gif


The Attempt at a Solution


Q=12*10^-9
A= Pi * r^2 = pi*(.012)^2
Q/A= (12*10^-9)/(pi*(.012)^2)
E=(Q/A)/epsilon naught (8.85*10^-12)
E= 3*10^6

I am not sure where I go wrong, but I have one attempt left and keep getting the same answer

Are you checking sig figs and units if entering online?
 
Hey student100, I am checking sig figs. It tells me to use 2
 
PhysKid45 said:
Hey student100, I am checking sig figs. It tells me to use 2

So you're entering 3.0?
 
Yup. I ended up guessing correctly, in an attempt to figure out the second part of the problem and the correct answer was 2.7*10^6 which I do not understand. Any ideas on how it would work out to be that?
 
PhysKid45 said:
Yup. I ended up guessing correctly, in an attempt to figure out the second part of the problem and the correct answer was 2.7*10^6 which I do not understand. Any ideas on how it would work out to be that?

Only thing that comes to mind is that they wanted you to use the percise formula for disks and not approximate them as infinite sheets of charge. Have you tried that?

There size compared to distance of separation leads me to be skeptical of that however. Are all the numbers presented correct?
 
Following Student100's advice, you should find that it does make a difference if you don't approximate the disks as infinite. However, I get 2.8 × 106 N/C rather than 2.7 × 106 N/C.
 
  • Like
Likes Student100
All numbers presented are correct.
I am not sure what you both mean by using the precise formula vs. approximating as an infinite sheet.
 
PhysKid45 said:
All numbers presented are correct.
I am not sure what you both mean by using the precise formula vs. approximating as an infinite sheet.
If you are taking a "calculus-based" physics course, then a standard example is the electric field of a circular disk.
http://www.phys.uri.edu/gerhard/PHY204/tsl36.pdf
 
Back
Top