Induced emf in a wire hard mathematically

In summary: You're vaguely on the right track, but here are a few comments:-"Benclosed" does not have any real meaning. Instead, you are actually trying to find ΦB = ∫B·dAfor the loop.-After writing B·dA in terms of r, the distance from a wire, the integration limits will be from d to L+d These are the distances from the vertical parts of the loop to either of the wires.-The final expression for ΦB should not depend on r (an integration variable), and should depend on time t somehow.-Thank you so much Redbelly. I'm going to try
  • #1
fluidistic
Gold Member
3,949
264

Homework Statement


See picture for clarity.
There are 2 infinite wires carrying a current i, one wire does it in the upward direction and the other wire in the downward direction. They are separated by a distance L+2d.
Between them lies a circuit such that the part that moves with a velocity v upward has a resistance R and the rest of the circuit has a negligible resistance.
1)Calculate the induced current through the rod moving at constant velocity v.
2)Calculate the force needed to maintain the constant velocity. (applied by an external agent)
3)The work done by the external agent by unit of time.

Homework Equations


None given.

The Attempt at a Solution


First I calculated the magnetic field between the 2 wires. I used Ampere's law. I reached [tex]B=\frac{\mu _0 I}{2\pi r}+\frac{\mu _0 I}{2\pi (L+2d-r)}[/tex], pointing into the sheet.
Now [tex]V=RI\Rightarrow I=\frac{V}{R}=-\frac{d\Phi _B}{dt}\cdot \frac{1}{R}[/tex].
So I must find [tex]\frac{d \Phi _B}{dt}[/tex].
First, I'm looking for [tex]\Phi _B[/tex].
I believe that [tex]\Phi _B = A\cdot B_{\text{enclosed}}[/tex].
So I integrated the expression I had found of B from d to L-d, which gave me [tex]B_{\text{enclosed}}=\frac{\mu _0 I}{2\pi r}\left [ \ln \left ( \frac{L-d}{d} \right) + \ln \left ( \frac{d+L}{3d} \right ) \right ][/tex].
Then [tex]\frac{d \Phi _B}{dt}=LvB_{\text{enclosed}}[/tex], thus [tex]I=-\frac{Lv B_{\text{enclosed}}}{R}[/tex].

It was so messy to calculate, I'm sure at 99.9999999999% I've made at least an error...
Could someone confirm it? Or at least tell me if my reasoning was right.
Thanks in advance.
 

Attachments

  • out.jpg
    out.jpg
    54.7 KB · Views: 419
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi there :smile:,

You're vaguely on the right track, but here are a few comments:

"Benclosed" does not have any real meaning. Instead, you are actually trying to find
ΦB = B·dA​
for the loop.

After writing B·dA in terms of r, the distance from a wire, the integration limits will be from d to L+d These are the distances from the vertical parts of the loop to either of the wires.

The final expression for ΦB should not depend on r (an integration variable), and should depend on time t somehow.
 
  • #3
Thank you so much Redbelly. I'm going to try tomorrow (a bit late for now).
Wow, so when I will calculate [tex]\frac{d \Phi _B}{dt}[/tex], it will go even messier since ∫B·dA depends on time!
I'll probably ask for further help tomorrow... but as of now, I say a big thank you.
:biggrin:
 
  • #4
Okay, good luck. By the way, it will be a fairly simple time-dependence, and a simple derivative.
 
  • #5
Redbelly98 said:
Okay, good luck. By the way, it will be a fairly simple time-dependence, and a simple derivative.

Here's my attempt: ΦB=∫B·dA=[tex]B\cdot A[/tex] because the 2 vectors are orthogonals. This gives me ΦB[tex]=\frac{\mu _0 I}{2\pi} \left[ \frac{1}{r}+\frac{1}{L+2d-r} \right] Lvt[/tex].
Integrating, [tex]\int_d^{L+d} \Phi _B dr=\frac{\mu _0 I Lvt}{2\pi} \left[ \ln \left ( \frac{L+d}{d} \right) +\ln \left ( \frac{L+3d}{d} \right ) \right ][/tex].
Derivating with respect to time, [tex]\frac{d \Phi _B}{dt}=\frac{\mu _0 I Lv}{2\pi} \left[ \ln \left ( \frac{L+d}{d} \right) +\ln \left ( \frac{L+3d}{d} \right ) \right ][/tex], thus [tex]I=-\frac{\mu _0 I Lv}{2\pi} \left[ \ln \left ( \frac{L+d}{d} \right) +\ln \left ( \frac{L+3d}{d} \right ) \right ] \cdot \frac{1}{R}[/tex]. Unfortunately I cancels out... What am I doing wrong?
 
  • #6
fluidistic said:
Here's my attempt: ΦB=∫B·dA=[tex]B\cdot A[/tex] because the 2 vectors are orthogonals. This gives me ΦB[tex]=\frac{\mu _0 I}{2\pi} \left[ \frac{1}{r}+\frac{1}{L+2d-r} \right] Lvt[/tex].
I didn't understand how did you get expression for ΦB.
Inside the loop field due to two current carrying conductors is identical.
So net ΦB= 2*Lvt*μo/2π*Intg[1/r]*dr between the limits d to (d+L).
 
  • #7
Use rl.bhat's hint, just do the integral for one wire and multiply the result by 2.

Also, dΦB/dt (1/R) gives you the current in the loop, not the current in the outside wires. They are different currents.
 
  • #8
rl.bhat said:
I didn't understand how did you get expression for ΦB.
Inside the loop field due to two current carrying conductors is identical.
So net ΦB= 2*Lvt*μo/2π*Intg[1/r]*dr between the limits d to (d+L).

Ok I made an error. Without using the trick of multiplying by 2 the integral of the first wire, I do it the hard way.
Here's my new attempt: From Ampere's law, the total electric field is given by [tex]B(r)=\frac{\mu _0I}{2\pi} \left[ \frac{1}{r}+\frac{1}{r-2d-L} \right][/tex].
Do you buy that? If so, then you should also buy that [tex]B\cdot dA=\frac{\mu _0I}{2\pi} \left[ \frac{1}{r}+\frac{1}{r-2d-L} \right] \codt Lvdt[/tex].
Integrating from d to L+d, I reached [tex]\Phi _B= \frac{Lvdt \mu _0 I}{2\pi}\int _d ^{L+d} \frac{1}{r}+\frac{1}{r-2d-L} dr=\frac{Lvdt \mu_0 I}{2\pi} \cdot \left [ \ln \left ( \frac{L+d}{d} \right ) + \ln \left ( \frac{d}{L+d} \right) \right ][/tex]. It seems to me it's worth 0...
Where did I go wrong?
 
  • #9
The distance of a point from the second wire in terms of r is (2d + L - r). Now you will get the required result. When you find magnetic field due to current carrying conductor, distance should be always positive. In your expression for second wire it is negative. That is why you got zero result.
 
  • #10
rl.bhat said:
The distance of a point from the second wire in terms of r is (2d + L - r). Now you will get the required result. When you find magnetic field due to current carrying conductor, distance should be always positive. In your expression for second wire it is negative. That is why you got zero result.

Ok thank you very much. So I'm the same case as before. I get [tex]\Phi _B =\frac{\mu _0 I vLdt}{2\pi} \left [ \ln \left ( \frac{L+d}{d} \right ) + \ln \left ( \frac{L+3d}{d}\right ) \right ][/tex].
I don't know what I'm missing... I'm sure it's wrong. Now I have to differentiate with respect to time...
 
  • #11
The term in question is a result of doing this integral:

[tex]\int_{d}^{L+d}\frac{1}{L+2d-r}dr
=-ln(L+2d-r)|_{d}^{L+d}[/tex]

L+2d-r is the distance to the right-hand wire here.
 

FAQ: Induced emf in a wire hard mathematically

What is induced emf in a wire?

Induced emf, or electromotive force, refers to the voltage that is created in a wire when there is a change in the magnetic field passing through the wire. This change in magnetic field can be caused by the movement of the wire, a change in the strength of the magnetic field, or a change in the orientation of the wire relative to the magnetic field.

How is induced emf in a wire calculated mathematically?

The mathematical formula for calculating induced emf in a wire is given by: e = -N(dΦ/dt), where e is the induced emf, N is the number of turns in the wire, and dΦ/dt is the rate of change of magnetic flux through the wire.

What is the role of Faraday's law in understanding induced emf in a wire?

Faraday's law of induction states that the magnitude of induced emf in a wire is directly proportional to the rate of change of magnetic flux through the wire. This law helps us understand the relationship between the magnetic field and the induced emf in a wire.

Can the direction of induced emf be determined using mathematical equations?

Yes, the direction of induced emf can be determined using Lenz's law, which states that the direction of induced emf is always such that it opposes the change in magnetic flux that is causing it. This can be mathematically represented by a negative sign in the induced emf formula.

How does the resistance of a wire affect induced emf mathematically?

The induced emf in a wire is directly proportional to the resistance of the wire. This can be seen in the formula e = -N(dΦ/dt), where the induced emf is directly proportional to the number of turns in the wire (N) and the rate of change of magnetic flux (dΦ/dt), both of which are constant. Therefore, a higher resistance in the wire will result in a higher induced emf.

Back
Top