Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract
Table of Contents
Content
Page
Number
Title page
Abstract
13
Discussion of Result
Conclusion
References
Appendix
10
V = E dl=
0
C=
dl= s d
Q A
=
V
d
No, because of the fringing effect; in fact; we assumed that the electric
field due to the two plates as if it was due to an infinite surface
uniform charge distribution; thus as the eparation increase or the
surface area decrease the electric field will behave differently and the
fringing effect will be more visible.
Simulation:
Question 1: Display the distribution of the electric field and potential inside the capacitor
in COMSOL. Are they as expected?
Yes, they was expected since the electric field was constant, parallel to the z
axis and going from the higher potential plate to the lower one as we know
from Gausss law, and the electric potential varies linearly from the upper
plate to the lower one which is a direct result of the constant electric field.
Question 2: Compare the result from the simulation with that calculated
from the equation derived in Part A of theory. Are they equal?
Using COMSOL:
1. Calculate the surface charge density for the upper plate using point evaluation at the
middle of the plate.
2. Calculate the capacitance using the charge density and the voltage.
Q= s S=3.54167 1010 0.152=7.9688 1012 [ C ]=7.969 [ pC ]
Q
C= =7.969 [ pF ]
V
Analytically:
A o 0.15
C= =
=7.969 [ pF ]
d
0.025
Comparison:
They are identical for more than 3 significant figures.
Question 3: Using different values of relative permittivity
listed in the
following table, find the capacitance using COMSOL and compare it with the
analytical value. Discuss your results.
Material
Air
7.969 [ pF ]
7.969 [ pF ]
Teflon
2.4
19.125 [ pF ]
19.125 [ pF ]
Wood
39.844 [ pF ]
39.844 [ pF ]
Simulation
Analytical
Inside the capacitor they look the same except near the edges of the
capacitor. The potential there looks different (equipotential lines in the plot
stat to be tilted) and the electric field will looks different near the edges as
well because it is perpendicular to the equipotential lines in the potential
plot. This difference is due to the fringing effect.
(Note: the above 2D is just to ease the observation. A 3D for the electric field
is below.
Question 5: Calculate the capacitance in COMSOL in a similar way as in Part (A). Compare the result
obtained here with the analytical value. How different are they? Discuss.
Using COMSOL:
1. Calculate the charges accumulated on the upper plate using derived value (surface
integration).
2. Calculate the capacitance using the charge and the potential difference.
12
Q=9.724463 10
[C ]
Q
C= =9.7245 [ pF ]
V
Part A:
C=7.969 [ pF ]
Comparison and Discussion:
The capacitance of the parallel plate non-ideal capacitor is higher than the capacitance of
the ideal one.
Question 6: Perform the simulation with different materials between the parallel-plates and
compare with analytical result in part A.
Material
Simulation
Analytical
Air
9.724 [ pF ]
7.969 [ pF ]
Teflon
2.4
20.905 [ pF ]
19.125 [ pF ]
Wood
41.640 [ pF ]
39.844 [ pF ]
II.Coaxial Cable:
Theory:
Given a coaxial transmission line as shown in Figure 2, derive the
expression
for
V = E dl=
a
a s
dl =
r
a s ln
( ba )
C / L=
Q/ L
2
=
V
b
ln ( )
a
Simulation:
Question 8: Display the electric field and potential distribution. Are they as expected?
Yes, they was expected since the electric field was inversely proportional
a^
with r and in the direction of
going from the higher potential cylinder to
the lower one as we know from Gausss law, and the electric potential varies
logarithmically from the inner cylinder to the outer one which is a direct
result of the inverse proportionality of the electric field.
Question 9: Calculate the capacitance per unit length in a similar way as in Part (A).
Compare the result with the analytical value. Discuss.
Using COMSOL:
3. Calculate the surface charge density for the outer cylinder using point evaluation.
4. Calculate the capacitance using the charge density and the voltage.
|QL|=| | SL =5.054418 10
C /L=79.40 [ pF / m ]
Analytically:
C /L=
2 2 2.3 o
=
=7.95027 1011 [ F /m ] =79.50 [ pF /m ]
ln ( 5)
b
ln
a
()
3.2185954710068643E-7
Conclusion
Based on the entire experiment, we can conclude that crude oil is
one of the most useful raw materials. In fact, diesel, gasoline and
kerosene are some of several matters which could be taken from
crude oil. Moreover, flash point is one of the most important
properties of oil, and we had introduced it previously. In addition,
we used a Close cup fully automated Pensky - Martens flash point
apparatus to find the flash point of the diesel sample, and
compare it to the flash point of other chemicals. However, from
this comparison we can figure out that the results was convenient
because it was between ( 56 96 ) and this is the range of the
flash point for the diesel. In addition, it is obvious that this diesel
has good safety aspects.
Recommendations:
To increase the students' knowledge about oil industry, we
recommend the university to:
make an annual tour to oil factories
encourage students (chemical engineers) to take minor in petroleum
engineering
Increase the general requirements in chemistry from a
course to two courses; thus, their knowledge will increase in
chemistry.
Reference
.