Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 20

Electrical Engineering Department

Electromagnetics term paper


Spring 2015
ELE - 311
Professor: Amer Zakariya
Name: Yousef Abo Rahama
ID:@00061131

Abstract

In the first part of this paper, the capacitance of a two parallel


plate capacitor and a coaxial cable will be investigated. First, the
formula of the capacitance of a two parallel plates capacitor will
be derived, beside the capacitance per unit length of a coaxial
cable. Next, using COMSOL, both structures with certain given
dimensions will be simulated, and the capacitance will be
computed and compared with the theoretical result.
In the second part of this paper, the inductance of a solenoid and
a coaxial cable will be studied and studied. First, the analytical
formula of the inductance of a solenoid will be derived, beside
the inductance per unit length of a coaxial cable. Next, using
COMSOL the solenoid and the coaxial cable will be simulated and
their inductance will be computed and compared with the
theoretical values.

Table of Contents
Content

Page
Number

Title page

Abstract

Electrostatics and Capacitance

Magneto statics and Inductance

13

Discussion of Result

Conclusion

References

Appendix

10

Part 1: Electrostatics and Capacitance


I. Parallel Plate Capacitor:
Part A: Ideal Parallel Plate Capacitor
Theory:
Using Gauss Law, derive an approximate expression for the capacitance
between two parallel rectangular conducting plates. Assume that the upper
plate is connected to the positive terminal of a voltage source, while the
lower plate is connected to the negative terminal of the same source (or
grounded). Assume that the surface charge distribution is uniform along
the plates. Also, assume the space between the two plates is relatively
small compared to the surface area of the plates. Figure 1 depicts this
configuration.
Q= s dA= A s
d

V = E dl=
0

C=

dl= s d

Q A
=
V
d

1. If the separation between the plates is comparable to the


surface area of the plates, is the equation derived above still
valid?

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

Comparison and discussion:


They are identical for more than 3 significant figures.

Analytical

Part B: Non-ideal Parallel Plate Capacitor


Question 4: Display the electric field and potential distribution. How are they different from
Part (A)?

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 ]

Question 7: Change the size of the surrounding block by increasing or


decreasing its dimensions and calculate the capacitance. Comment on the
change in capacitance value.
By increasing the surrounding block size the capacitance increases and vice
versa.

II.Coaxial Cable:
Theory:
Given a coaxial transmission line as shown in Figure 2, derive the
expression

for

the capacitance per unit length. Assume that the inner

conductor is connected to the positive terminal of a source while the outer


conductor is grounded. Moreover, assume that the charge is uniformly
distributed.
Q/ L= s / L dA=2 as

V = E dl=
a

a s
dl =
r

a s ln

( ba )

Figure 1: Coaxial Cable

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

2 2.5 103=79.395 1011 [ C /m ] =79.40 [ pC /m ]

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

()

Comparison and Discussion:


They are roughly same, and since the program uses finite elements method (numerical method
to solve PDEs), a small error is expected because of the rounded shape of the capacitor. (The
triangular meshes wont be very accurate, but the approximation still good. In fact after
increasing the number of meshes the result become nearer to the analytic one.)

Part 2: Magnetostatics and Inductance


I.Long Tightly Wound Solenoid:
Theory:
Simulation:
Question 1: Display the magnetic field using a normalized arrow plot. Is the
result as expected?
Discuss.

Yes, because inside the selinoid the magnatic fiel


Question 2: How does the inductance value compare with the analytical
results?
Using COMSOL:
L=2.5048 105 [ H ] =25.048[ H ]
Analytically:
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.
In the upper and lower sheets, change the current density to that of the
second model described in the script. After doing the relevant changes on
the upper and lower sheets, compute the simulation again and calculate the
inductance
.
Question 3: Did the value of the inductance change?
Yes, the new value of the inductance is 1.96728[H ] .

II.Coaxial Transmission Line:


Theory:
Simulation:

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
.

[1 A. Zakaria, "Laboratory Assignment 2 (Electrostatics and Capacitance),"


] University of manitoba, 2010.
[2 A. Zakaria, "Laboratory Assignment 3 (Magnetostatics and Inductance),"
] University of Manitoba, 2010.

Вам также может понравиться