Electrical Engineering Department

Electromagnetics term paper

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

1|Page
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. 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.

2|Page
Table of Contents

Content Page Number

Title page 1

Abstract 2

Electrostatics and Capacitance 4

Results 13

Conclusion 17

References 18

3|Page
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.

= =

= = =
0

= =

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?
4|Page
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.

5|Page
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.

= = 3.54167 1010 0.152 = 7.9688 1012 [] = 7.969[]

= = 7.969[]

Analytically:

0.152
= = = 7.969[]
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 Simulation Analytical

Air 1 7.969[] 7.969[]
Teflon 2.4 19.125[] 19.125[]
Wood 5 39.844[] 39.844[]

Comparison and discussion:

They are identical for more than 3 significant figures.

6|Page
Part B: Non-ideal Parallel Plate Capacitor
Question 4: Display the electric field and potential distribution. How are they different from Part
(A)?

7|Page
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.

8|Page
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.

= 9.724463 1012 []

= = 9.7245[]

Part A:

= 7.969[]

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 1 9.724[] 7.969[]
Teflon 2.4 20.905[] 19.125[]
Wood 5 41.640[] 39.844[]

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.

9|Page
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.

/ = / = 2

ln ()
= = =

/ 2
/ = =
ln( )

Figure 1: Coaxial Cable

10 | P a g e
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 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.

11 | P a g e
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.

| | = | | = 5.054418 109 2 2.5 103 = 79.395 1011 [/] = 79.40[/]

/ = 79.40[/]

Analytically:

2 2 2.3
/ =
= = 7.95027 1011 [/] = 79.50[/]
ln () ln(5)

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.)

12 | P a g e
Part 2: Magnetostatics and Inductance
I. Long Tightly Wound Solenoid:
Theory:
By using amperes law, the inductance for Long Tightly Wound Solenoid is given by:

Simulation:
Question 1: Display the magnetic field using a normalized arrow plot. Is the result as expected?
Discuss.

13 | P a g e
Yes, because inside the solenoid the magnetic field is orthogonal to the differential current along
with the distance vector.

Question 2: what is the inductance value?

Using COMSOL:

= 2.5048 105 [] = 25.048 []

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 19.6728 [].

14 | P a g e
II. Coaxial Transmission Line:
Theory:
By using Biot-Savart law, the inductance for a Coaxial cable is given by:

/ = ln( )
2

Simulation:
Question 4: Display the magnetic field. Is it as expected?

Yes, it is.

15 | P a g e
Question 5: Compare the inductance value from COMSOL with the analytical value. Discuss.

Using COMSOL:

/ = = 321.860[/]

Analytically:

/ = ln( ) = 321.888[/]
2
Comparison and Discussion:

They are roughly same.

16 | P a g e
Conclusion
In conclusion, the paper demonstrates that it is possible to derive an expression
for the capacitance of a two parallel-plate capacitor and a coaxial cable using Gauss
Law. The results were then verified using COMSOL, by giving the structures known
dimensions and thereafter comparing the simulated results with the theoretical results.
When the separation of a parallel-plate capacitor is comparable to the cross-sectional
area, the effects of fringing become more apparent, leading to uncertainty in the
theoretical values. Initially, when COMSOL was used to model an ideal parallel-plate
capacitor, the results were identical the calculated values, illustrating the validity of the
equation derived. However, the capacitance was greater in the non-ideal case as a
consequence of the fringing effect, which was verified using COMSOL. In addition,
COMSOL showed that the capacitance increased by increasing the surrounding block
size. In the case of the coaxial cable, the capacitance values obtained from COMSOL
were very close to the calculated values, and the slight difference came about because the
program makes approximations using the method of finite counting elements.

The second part of the paper involved investigating the inductance of a long
tightly-wound solenoid and a coaxial transmission line. When the magnetic field was
plotted using a normalized arrow plot, the results were as expected because the magnetic
field inside the solenoid is orthogonal to the differential current along with the distance
vector.

17 | P a g e
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.

18 | P a g e