Skin depth: Same for current as for incoming EM wave?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of skin depth in conductors, particularly focusing on whether the skin depth for an incoming electromagnetic wave is the same as that for the current generated by an alternating current (AC) source in a cylindrical conductor. The scope includes theoretical considerations and mathematical reasoning related to electromagnetic wave propagation and current distribution in conductors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the skin depth, denoted as ##\delta##, applies equally to both the incoming electromagnetic wave and the current generated by an AC source in a cylindrical conductor, suggesting a similar attenuation behavior.
  • Others argue that while the skin depth conceptually applies, the distribution of AC current in a cylindrical conductor is not simply a function of depth and may depend on additional factors, particularly when the radius of the cylinder is not much larger than the skin depth.
  • A later reply questions the initial assumption regarding the uniformity of the AC current distribution, suggesting that the current should vary with the radial coordinate in cylindrical coordinates.
  • One participant clarifies the use of coordinates, indicating that the depth referred to in the discussion is parallel to the radial coordinate in cylindrical coordinates.
  • Another participant introduces a mathematical framework, referencing a modified Bessel's equation to describe the current distribution in cylindrical conductors, indicating that the initial assumption may not hold in general.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the skin depth concept to AC currents in cylindrical conductors. There is no consensus on whether the same attenuation factor applies universally, as some argue for specific conditions while others challenge the initial claims.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the assumptions made regarding the geometry of the conductor and the conditions under which the skin depth applies. The dependence on the radius of the cylinder relative to the skin depth is noted as a critical factor in determining the accuracy of the proposed models.

Wminus
Messages
173
Reaction score
29
For a good conductor, an incoming plane electromagnetic wave will be attenuated exponentially as it penetrates a distance ##z## into the conductor, ##|\vec{E}(z)| = |\vec{E_0}|e^{-z/ \delta}##. ##\delta## is called the "skin depth". The current generated by this incoming electromagnetic wave is given by ohm's law and thus will be attenuated in the same fashion ##\vec{J_E} = \sigma \vec{E} \Rightarrow |\vec{J_E(z)}| = |\vec{J_{E0}}|e^{-z/ \delta}##.

OK, this is all fair enough. It falls out from maxwell's equations.

However, if you have a cylindrical conductor and you connect it to a high-frequency AC power source, it turns out that that the resulting electrical current ##\vec{J_{AC}}## will have the exact same distribution as ## \vec{J_E}##. Namely, ##\vec{J_{AC}} = \vec{J_{AC0}} e^{-z/ \delta}##, with the exactly same attenuation factor (delta) as before.

Why is this so? Does this mean an AC power source generates a potential difference in the conductor in the same way an incoming electromagnetic wave does?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wminus said:
For a good conductor, an incoming plane electromagnetic wave will be attenuated exponentially as it penetrates a distance ##z## into the conductor, ##|\vec{E}(z)| = |\vec{E_0}|e^{-z/ \delta}##. ##\delta## is called the "skin depth". The current generated by this incoming electromagnetic wave is given by ohm's law and thus will be attenuated in the same fashion ##\vec{J_E} = \sigma \vec{E} \Rightarrow |\vec{J_E(z)}| = |\vec{J_{E0}}|e^{-z/ \delta}##.
This is true for a plane wave incident on a plane conductor that occupies the half-space ## z>0##.
Wminus said:
However, if you have a cylindrical conductor and you connect it to a high-frequency AC power source, it turns out that that the resulting electrical current ##\vec{J_{AC}}## will have the exact same distribution as ## \vec{J_E}##. Namely, ##\vec{J_{AC}} = \vec{J_{AC0}} e^{-z/ \delta}##, with the exactly same attenuation factor (delta) as before.
I am wondering how you came up with this result, as I think it isn't correct. Qualitatively, would you expect that an AC current in a wire is not a function of ##r##? (Here I am assuming you are using cylindrical coordinates with your conductor along the ##z## axis - it helps us understand if you define your coordinates!).

jason
 
You're right, sorry about the unclear coordinates. ##z## here is the depth, the distance from the surface to a point radially inside the cylinder, so it's parallel to (cylindrical coordinate) r. It's not the length along the z-axis.

Basically I should've called the "depth" ##d## instead of ##z## to avoid confusion.
 
Okay - so I understood your coordinates. I am also assuming you are using ##e^{i \omega t} ## time dependence for the rest of this post.

While your formula in the second case is approximately true when the radius of the cylinder is much much larger than the skin depth, it is not true in general. Just like in the planar case, inside your good conductor (which is assumed to satisfy Ohm's law, and for which the displacement current is negligible compared to the conduction current) we have
<br /> \nabla^2 \mathbf{J} = i \mu \omega \sigma \mathbf{J}<br />
If you solve this in the planar case with the appropriate boundary condition you get your first answer. For the simple cylindrical case, ##\mathbf{J} = \mathbf{\hat{z}}J_z(r) ##, so the equation becomes
<br /> \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r \frac{\partial J_z}{\partial r} \right) = i \mu \omega \sigma J_z<br />
Solve this with the appropriate boundary conditions and you will get the answer you are looking for. (EDIT: hint: this is a modified Bessel's equation)

jason
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wminus

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K