What's the direction of induced emf here?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of induced electromotive force (emf) and voltage in a conducting rod moving on parallel rails within a magnetic field. When the rod is a conductor, the induced emf and the voltage drop due to resistance (IR) act in opposing directions, leading to confusion about the potential difference across the rod's ends. The emf is directed from point b to a, resulting in a positive potential at a relative to b, which can be understood through charge accumulation in the rod. If the rod moves at a steady speed, the forces acting on charge carriers reach equilibrium, leading to a relationship where emf equals the potential difference minus the voltage drop due to resistance. The discussion clarifies that outside the rod, the potential difference balances with the circuit's resistance, emphasizing the importance of understanding both Faraday's law and Ohm's law in this context.
har
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
This thing has confused me for long .I have not come across any satisfactory answers on my own or while browsing through the internet.
Everybody has seen the example of a rod moving while on parallel rails, with magnetic field perpendicular to the plane of loop formed by rod and rails.
When the rod is an insulator, no current flows,direction of induced emf is easily understood.
Now, consider the case in which rod is an conductor with some resistance . The induced emf across the rod according to faraday's law and voltage across it according to v = IR are in opposing directions.
As,shown in the thumb nail ,if i attatch voltmeter across ab(Va-Vb) ends will it be positive ?
if yes, then explain how drop caused by IR is not negative acrosss ab?
 

Attachments

  • ole4.gif
    ole4.gif
    13.4 KB · Views: 570
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You're confusing the Emf that comes from Faraday's law of induction with a voltage drop that comes from Ohms law.
 
It removes one annoying complication to suppose that the charge carriers in the conductor are positive rather than negative. Having mastered the argument in terms of positive carriers, you can then adapt it to negative carriers.

The emf is in the direction b to a through the rod (that is counterclockwise around the circuit as drawn). This is because the carriers are forced through the rod in the direction b to a, and during their passage work is done on them, indirectly by means of the work done by the external agency pushing the rod to the right, mediated by the magnetic field.

a is at a positive potential relative to b. It is easy to understand this by imagining cd to be open-circuit. Then positive carriers will pile up at the top end of the rod, leaving the bottom end negatively charged. The p.d. arises from from the charge imbalance. The consequent potential gradient across the rod means there is a downward electric field and a downward force on the charge carriers. [Within a split second of starting to move the rod, this force will balance the upward magnetic force and the carriers will stop moving up the rod.]

If cd is not open-circuit, then a will still be at a positive potential relative to b. This is because if we move the rod at a steady speed, carriers will quickly reach a terminal velocity, when there is no net force on them. For a carrier inside the rod, this will be when…

Magnetic force – Electric field force – resistive force due to collisions = 0

[Strictly these 'forces' are magnitudes of forces; the directions are taken care of by the signs. Sorry of this is considered poor form; I don't know how au fait the original poster is with vector notation.]

Multiplying each term by the rod length (to get the work done on a charge carrier moving through the whole rod), and dividing by the charge on a carrier, we get

EMF – PD – Ir = 0

Here r is the rod resistance. If it's negligible, then |p.d. between a and b| = |emf|.

Outside the rod there is no emf and p.d - IR = 0

in which R is the resistance of the outside circuit, bcda.
 
Last edited:
You haven't said if you're any clearer. Are you?
 
Thread 'What is the pressure of trapped air inside this tube?'
As you can see from the picture, i have an uneven U-shaped tube, sealed at the short end. I fill the tube with water and i seal it. So the short side is filled with water and the long side ends up containg water and trapped air. Now the tube is sealed on both sides and i turn it in such a way that the traped air moves at the short side. Are my claims about pressure in senarios A & B correct? What is the pressure for all points in senario C? (My question is basically coming from watching...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K