Spherical Capacitors, electric fields.

In summary, the conversation discusses an air-filled capacitor consisting of a conducting sphere of radius a and a concentric conducting spherical surface of radius b. A charge of 2Q is placed on the inner sphere and -Q on the outer surface. The electric field strength is calculated between the two spherical surfaces for a < r < b and for r > b. The energy stored in the region between the two surfaces and in the region r > b is also calculated. The conversation also touches on using Gauss' law for closed surfaces and the principle of superposition.
  • #1
Spoony
77
0

Homework Statement



An air-filled capacitor consists of a conducting sphere of radius a, surrounded by a concentric conducting spherical surface of radius b. A charge of 2Q is placed on the inner sphere and –Q on the outer surface. Calculate the electric field strengths E(r), (i) between the two spherical surfaces, i.e. for a < r < b and (ii) for r>b Calculate energy stored in region between 2 surfaces and in region , r> b.

[in this question you may assume that the dialectric constant of air is equal to 1]


Homework Equations



Gauss' law for closed surfaces.

The Attempt at a Solution



I use the standard method of finding the electric field from each using gauss' law and then sum them, but i find my awnser is:

[tex] E(r) = \frac{3Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0} r^{2}} [/tex]

When the awnser given is the same but only 2Q rather than 3...
so it seems that only the centre sphere is contributing to the electric field.. but i think i must be wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Forgot to mention I am using the principle of supersition for the section between the plates.
 
  • #3
Spoony said:
When the awnser given is the same but only 2Q rather than 3...
so it seems that only the centre sphere is contributing to the electric field.. but i think i must be wrong.

Well, in between the two conductors, only the charge enclosed by your Gaussian surface contributes to the flux right? And the flux I refer to is the flux of the net electric field through that surface not the flux of just the component due to the inner charge:wink:
 
  • #4
so to find the flux of the outer sphere and therefore its electric field id have to do a gaussian surface over the outer sphere then subtract the inner spheres electric field and id have equations for both of the spheres fluxes/electric fields, i then just sum these together for the field inbetween?
 
  • #5
No, my point was that the E in gauss' law:

[tex]\int_{\mathcal{GS}}\mathbf{E}\cdot\mathbf{da}=\frac{q_{enc}}{\epsilon_0}[/tex]

is the total electric field. So when you calculate that E at some location ([itex]a\leq r\leq b[/itex] in this case), You calculate the total electric field at that point. There is no need to add/subtract any other constituent fields.
 
  • #6
But that means that you could have a tiny sphere of quite small charge in space and at around it have a massive surface that was spherical with a huge charge upon it, taking the gassian surface to just below the larger sphere would only give you the electric field due to the smaller sphere, it compeltely ignores the larger.
same would happen from 1 almost point charge (dr sphere) and this could be a distance c away from a massively charged object. then taking a gaussian sphere c-d where d<<c youd end up with the electric field from just the small sphere of charge...

Is this how it really works? its very weird :S
 
  • #7
Spoony said:
But that means that you could have a tiny sphere of quite small charge in space and at around it have a massive surface that was spherical with a huge charge upon it, taking the gassian surface to just below the larger sphere would only give you the electric field due to the smaller sphere, it compeltely ignores the larger.

No, it would give you the total electric field. Just because the magnitude of that field depends only on the inner charge, doesn't mean its the field due to just that charge.

Anyways, the field inside of a uniformly charged spherical shell is zero isn't it? That means the contribution of the outer charge to the total electric field in your eample would be zero anyway.
 
  • #8
Spoony said:
same would happen from 1 almost point charge (dr sphere) and this could be a distance c away from a massively charged object. then taking a gaussian sphere c-d where d<<c youd end up with the electric field from just the small sphere of charge...

Is this how it really works? its very weird :S

Taking a spherical shell for your gaussian is only useful if the charge distributions (and hence the elecric field they produce) are spherically symmetric about a common center. So this example would only work if the massive outer charge was a uniform spherical shell centered on the point charge. Otherwise, the fild would not be uniform and radial and gauss law would be useless.
 
  • #9
i thought it was zero unless it contained a charge inside, which it does :P lol couldve figured it out that way quicker.
would the same be true of my second example as well? (ie use gauss' law the second larger charge doesn't depend on field)
so using the q enclosed gives me the required awnser, then for when r>b i do a gaussian surface containing both spheres? or just the outer one?
 
  • #10
Spoony said:
then for when r>b i do a gaussian surface containing both spheres? or just the outer one?

Well if r>b, then your gaussian does enclose both spheres right:wink: Remember, r is the radius of your gaussian.
 
  • #11
yup thought so just checking :).

interlude question :P to express potential energy of a finite charge distribution in empty space in terms of charge density and electrostatic potential V. I am then asked to show that the energy may be regarded as distrubuted with energy density:
[tex] \frac{ \epsilon_{0} E^{2}}{2} [/tex]
this is after I am told to state gauss' law of electrostatics...
sorry for asking a question in a topic for another question, but this took me by suprise, I've never been asked to derive this, i just assumed that it was this value, would i take my potential energy of the distribution and calculate its derivitive with respect to volume? that would be energy density but how abouts would i do that.. I am guessing ihave to relate it to a maxwell equation

Back on topic.. :

Energy stored is just the integral of the field by [tex] dV = 4 \pi r^{2} dr [/tex] with limits b and a for the E inside and b and infinity for outside? or is there a speedier way of doing it?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Any ideas? I've read some where energy density is:
[tex] = \frac{1}{2} E^{2} \epsilon_{0} [/tex]
but i don't know how to put the limits of distance on it..
 

1. What is a spherical capacitor?

A spherical capacitor is a type of capacitor that consists of two concentric spherical conducting shells separated by a dielectric material. It is used to store and regulate electrical energy by creating an electric field between the two shells.

2. How does a spherical capacitor work?

A spherical capacitor works by storing electrical energy in the form of an electric field between its two concentric spherical shells. When a voltage is applied, the electric field is created, and the capacitor stores the energy in the form of separated charges on its shells. The dielectric material between the shells helps to maintain the electric field and prevents the charges from flowing back and forth.

3. What is the equation for the capacitance of a spherical capacitor?

The capacitance of a spherical capacitor is given by the equation C = 4πε0εrr, where C is the capacitance, ε0 is the permittivity of free space, εr is the relative permittivity of the dielectric material, and r is the radius of the inner shell.

4. How does the electric field vary inside a spherical capacitor?

The electric field inside a spherical capacitor is directly proportional to the distance from the center of the capacitor. It increases as you move closer to the inner shell and decreases as you move further away. At the surface of the inner shell, the electric field is the strongest, and it is zero at the outer shell.

5. How is a spherical capacitor different from other types of capacitors?

A spherical capacitor is different from other types of capacitors in its shape and structure. Unlike a parallel plate capacitor, which has two flat plates, a spherical capacitor has two spherical shells. This shape allows for a more uniform electric field distribution and a higher capacitance value. Additionally, the use of a dielectric material between the shells allows for a higher voltage capacity and a lower risk of breakdown.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
711
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
940
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top