Why Does Current Density Yield Different Results in Two Scenarios?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the calculation of current in cylindrical conductors with varying current density profiles. In the first scenario, the current density is maximum at the axis (j = jo(1-r/R)), leading to a current of (1/2)jopiR^3. In the second scenario, where current density is maximum at the surface (j = jor/R), the same current value is obtained, (1/2)jopiR^3. The confusion arises from the realization that both scenarios yield identical results despite differing current density distributions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cylindrical coordinates in physics
  • Familiarity with current density equations
  • Knowledge of integral calculus for area calculations
  • Basic concepts of electrical conductivity
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the derivation of current density equations in cylindrical conductors
  • Study the implications of varying current density on electrical performance
  • Learn about the physical significance of current density profiles
  • Investigate the application of integral calculus in electromagnetism
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, physics students, and professionals involved in the design and analysis of cylindrical conductors and electrical systems.

Destrio
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
a) The current density across a cylindrical conductor of radius R varies according tot he equation j = jo(1-r/R)
where r is the distance from the axis. Thus the current density is a maximum jo at the axis r=0 and decreases linearly to zero at the surface r=R. Calculate the current in terms of jo and the conductor's cross sectional area A = piR^2

so i took i = integral from 0 to R of jdA
i = jopiR^2(r-r^2/2R) |(0,R)
i = jopiR^2(R-(R/2) = (1/2)jopiR^3

b) Suppose that instead the current density is a maximum jo at the surface and decreases linearly to zero on the axis, so that
j = jor/R

so i did the same thing and got
i=jopiR(R^2/2) = (1/2)jopiR^3

Why is the result different from a?
I realized at this point in the question that I must have made a mistake, as I got the same result from b as i did in a

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
anyone?
 
You may want to try making dA an infinitesimal ring so that dA = 2(Pi)(r)(dr) I believe you will get something like 1/2 and 1/6 R^2
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
822
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K