Solenoid Magnetic Field calculation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of the magnetic field in a solenoid, specifically questioning why only the current entering the page is considered and whether the vertical components of the magnetic field are truly zero. It is clarified that vertical components cancel each other out due to symmetry, and the upper part of the rectangle is assumed to be far enough to not influence the field. The use of Ampere's law is emphasized, which states that only the current passing through the defined area is relevant for the calculation. For a more precise understanding, Biot-Savart's law is suggested, especially for finite solenoids, as it accounts for the effects of the wire's winding more accurately. The conversation highlights the nuances of applying different laws in electromagnetic calculations.
UMath1
Messages
361
Reaction score
9
I am confused about how the magnetic field of a solenoid is calculated in this image.
sol.gif

Why is only the current going into the page included in calculating the magnetic field? Shouldn't the field be twice the amount calculated because there is a magnetic field generated by the part of the turns the bottom with current going out of the page? And I don't understand why the vertical components of the path are taken to be zero. Although it is said that the field is perpendicular, the diagram shows that there is a portion of the field parallel to the vertical path.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. But it doesn't answer my question.
 
UMath1 said:
Why is only the current going into the page included in calculating the magnetic field? Shouldn't the field be twice the amount calculated because there is a magnetic field generated by the part of the turns the bottom with current going out of the page?
Ampere's law is used.
It says that only the current passing through the area of the rectangle is to be included in the calculation:

circ H ⋅ ds = N * I

UMath1 said:
And I don't understand why the vertical components of the path are taken to be zero.

They are not taken to be zero, but they cancel each other due to symmetrical reasons. The formula is only valid as for the center of the solenoid.

The upper side of the rectangle is assumed to be so far away, that it has no influence, so this horizontal component is taken to be zero.
You are the one to sketch the rectangle.
 
Yes I understand that. But if you use ampere's law that way, the circular winding of the wire seems to have no bearing on the field inside the wire. I thought that the field inside the solenoid is increased because of the winding if the wire.
 
UMath1 said:
But if you use ampere's law that way, the circular winding of the wire seems to have no bearing on the field inside the wire. I thought that the field inside the solenoid is increased because of the winding if the wire.
I'm not using Ampere's law that way, just using Ampere's law.

If you want a "bearing", you must use Biot-Savart's law. It doesn't need symmetry, infinite length of the solenoid, and so on.

Biot-Savart is accurate in case of finite length of the solenoid. Ampere is an approximation.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top