Resistivity calculation from two-probe resistance measurement of sheet

AI Thread Summary
Calculating resistivity from two-probe resistance measurements requires consideration of contact area geometry, particularly when using point contacts, which theoretically yield infinite resistance. The discussion highlights that the perimeter of each contact area is crucial for accurate calculations. An exact solution can be derived using elliptical equipotentials around each contact area, with the central ellipse acting as the bisector between them. The potential distribution is related to the logarithmic ratio of distances to the centers of these ellipses. Understanding these factors is essential for accurate resistivity calculations.
no_einstein
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
New user has been reminded to please always show their work on schoolwork problems.
Homework Statement
You make a two-probe resistance measurement (probe spacing S) of an infinite sheet (thickness t) of a high-resistance material. How do you calculate the resistivity of the material?
Relevant Equations
R = ohm, rho = ohm*m
I'm really not sure. Obviously I can get the units right with Resistance * thickness, but I assume there's a correction factor here that I can't find anywhere?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I studied this once out of my own interest. I concluded that as stated in post #1 it makes no sense. What you also need to know is the perimeter of each contact area. With point contacts the theoretical resistance is infinite.
If we take those areas to be elliptical, we can have an exact solution with nested elliptical equipotentials around each contact ellipse. The 'central ellipse', i.e. where the one family transmutes into the other, is the perpendicular bisector of the two contact areas. The potential at any point is proportional to the logarithm of the ratio of distances to the 'centres', i.e. where the two families of ellipses would shrink to zero.
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top