You are on page 1of 7

Forces and Energy functions for dielectric systems Prof. R.S.

Sorbello, UWM March, 2008 Consider a dielectric slab partly inside and partly outside a parallel plate capacitor as shown, for example, in Fig. 4.30 on page 194 of Griffiths. The capacitor plates have length l , width w, and are separated by a distance d. The slab has thickness d and the coordinate of the left-hand edge of the slab is x. (If x= 0, the slab would be occupying the entire space between the plates.) The energy stored in the electric field is
2 1 , W = ( r ) E ( r ) d 2

(1)

( r ) is the permittivity at position r and E ( r )is the electric field at position r. where The volume integral is over all space, and this reduces to the space between the plates if we ignore the energy associated with the fringing fields near the edge of the capacitor and beyond. This means that the volume integral in Eq.(1) is taken only over the space ( r ) = in the sub-region that is occupied by the between the plates, and in this region, ( r ) = dielectric and in the sub-region between the plates where there is no dielectric. 0 Therefore, W =
1 2 E d+ 1 20 2 v a c u u m d i e l e c t r i c

2 E d

1 2 1 = E x w d + 20 2

E ( l x ) w d
2

(2)

where we have used the fact that E is uniform throughout the region between the plates, and hence is the same in both the vacuum and dielectric regions inside the capacitor. Let F be the mechanical force that you need to supply in the x-direction to hold the dielectric slab in place. Since in an infinitesimal displacement dx, you do work Fdx and this goes into increasing the energy stored in the electric field, the force that you exert is given by F= d W . d x (3)

It will turn out that F is positive, meaning that the dielectric is sucked into the region between the plates by the action of electric field (or Coulomb forces) in the system. (Recall that you have to exert a mechanical force F that is equal and opposite to the force

2 due to the electric field. Also note: Griffiths uses F to denote the force that you exert on the dielectric rather than +F as we use here.) Now comes the subtle part: When we take the derivative on the RHS of Eq. (3), what is to be treated as a constant? Can we treat E as a constant, which would seem to imply that a battery is somehow involved in keeping the voltage V fixed? Or should we treat the free charge +Q and Q on the plates as constant, which implies that the system is electrically isolated, meaning that no additional free charge can flow onto either plate? The answer is that we must treat Q as fixed and not E as fixed. This is true even if a battery is connected to the capacitor, in which case V and E are both kept fixed as you move the dielectric by an amount dx! How can this be? The key point is that it is only for an isolated system (fixed Q) that you can say that when you move the dielectric by dx , the change in the stored electrical energy dW comes entirely from the mechanical work Fdx that you do. Thus Eq. (3) is correct only for such a fixed-Q process. To be more precise, we must therefore write the derivative on the RHS of Eq.(3) as a derivative in which the condition to be obeyed is that Q is held constant. In the language of partial derivatives, this is W F= . x Q (4)

On the other hand, if you say that there is an attached battery that keeps the voltage (and therefore E-field) constant as you move the dielectric by dx , then the change in the stored electrical energy dW comes partly from the mechanical work Fdx that you W do and partly from additional electrical work d b a t t e r ydone by the battery. But the latter d W = V d Q is given by , where dQ is the extra charge that goes from the battery into b a t t e r y the capacitor to maintain the capacitor at a fixed voltage during the displacement dx. Therefore, d W =F d x+d W b a t t e r y =F d x+ V d Q . (5)

Dividing by dx and re-arranging terms, we get from the last equation the result dW dQ F= V , where in this case we are holding V fixed in taking these derivatives. dx dx In the language of partial derivatives, this result is W Q F= V . x V x V (6)

We emphasize that Eq.(4) and Eq.(6) must both give exactly the same result for F! This follows from the fact that the electric force on the dielectric when it is at any

3 given position x, depends only on the charge distribution in the system (both free and bound charge densities). So when the dielectric is at any position x and the free charge on the plates is specified, then there is a unique force on the dielectric whether or not the capacitor is attached to a battery. Of course, a battery would have been needed to originally charge-up the capacitor so that it has free charges Q on the plates, but once this is done, the battery can be disconnected. The force on the dielectric after the battery is disconnected will be the same as it was with the battery connected provided that the position x is held fixed. Now to actually calculate F, we can use Eq.(4), with W given by Eq.(2). But in using Eq.(2), we must be careful to write E in terms of Q so that we can perform the indicated derivative at constant Q. Alternatively, we can use Eq.(6), in which case the expression for W in Eq. (2) is easy to use because V being held constant as the condition on the derivatives in Eq.(6), means that E is to be held constant when taking the derivatives. However, there is the extra term V (Q / x )V that needs to be evaluated on the RHS of Eq.(6), so we would have to express Q as a function of V and x so that we could evaluate that partial derivative. This means that we have to calculate the capacitance of the structure since Q =C(x)V. But if we are going to evaluate the capacitance, there is a better way to proceed, as we now describe. To determine F in terms of the capacitance of the system, we note that W is the electrical energy stored in a capacitor, which can be expressed in terms of the capacitance C of the structure in either of the two equivalent ways: W= or C V2 W= 2 . (7b)
2 Q 2C

(7a)

As discussed in Griffiths, W contains contributions from the distortion of "molecular springs" in addition to the pure Coulomb potential energy of the free and induced charges in the system. (This fact is irrelevant for the subsequent analysis.) If we use Eq.(7a) into Eq.(4), we get Q2 F= x 2C Q Since C is a function only of x, this gives
2 2 Q d1 Q d C . F = () = 2 2 d x C 2 d x C

(8)

(9)

4 Upon using Q=CV in the last equality, we finally get


2 V d C F = . 2 d x

(10)

We remark that C(x) can be readily determined by equating the expressions for W given by Eqs.(2) and (7b) and making the substitution E=V/d in Eq.(2). Now let's see if we get the result given by Eq.(10) by applying Eq.(6) rather than Eq.(4). Substituting Eq.(7b) into Eq.(6), we find F= x which gives
2 V d C F = . 2 d x

( CV )
1 2 2

(CV ) V , x V V

(11)

(12)

Comparing Eqs (10) and (12), we see that we do get the same result for F whether we use Eq.(4) or Eq. (6). In the case of Eq. (4) we imagined the capacitor plates to be isolated; in the case of Eq. (6) we imagined the capacitor plates to be hooked up to a battery. Of course, in any specific process between initial and final values of V and Q, the values of V and Q at any step in the process will depend on the details of the path in the "QV-space" that the process follows. So for example, V will be constant in a process where a battery is attached, and Q will be a constant in a process the plates are isolated (no battery attached). This means that Wmech will depend on the specific path of the process between initial values of Q,V and final values of Q,V. (In math language, this means that dWmech is an "imperfect differential," and the notation dWmech is often used to signify that property.) There is an interesting thing to notice here. If you were to use Eq. (3) and substituted expression (7b) for W in Eq. (3), you would get
2 d Wd C V F = = . d x d x 2

(13)

So far this is correct, but it must be understood that in the derivative, one must keep Q constant, as pointed out in the discussion leading to Eq.(4), which is the exact, explicit form of Eq.(3). Now if you made the mistake of taking the derivative on the RHS of Eq. (13) by keeping V fixed instead of keeping Q fixed, you would get V 2 dC F = + 2 dx (WRONG!!!) (14)

5 This last expression is wrong because it was obtained by incorrectly keeping V constant rather than Q constant in taking the derivative. However, comparing the wrong result (14) with the correct result (10) or (12), we notice that the wrong method turns out to give the correct magnitude for the force but the wrong sign! Since C will decrease as x increases, the quantity dC/dx is negative. So the wrong result would predict that the force you would apply to keep the dielectric in place is negative, implying that if you were to let go of the dielectric, the dielectric would be ejected from the capacitor, as if fired from a gun! The correct result is that the dielectric is sucked into the region between the plates rather than repelled from it. A caveat: It is tempting to say that one can always get the correct magnitude of F by making the simple, though erroneous, analysis leading from Eq.(13) to Eq.(14), so why bother about all the details in the correct analysis just to get the correct sign? After all, we can always fudge our final result by tacking on the right sign at the end. It is just an accident that an incorrect analysis turns out to give the correct magnitude of the force, so don't expect to get credit for such an analysis. Furthermore, besides the fact that Eq. (14) is wrong because the method leading up to it is wrong, there are cases where Eq.(14) also gives the wrong magnitude for F. This happens if we are dealing with a certain class of dielectric media, known as non-linear dielectrics. Although we normally don't encounter such exotic media in an undergraduate course, such media do exist and do have technological applications. A non-linear dielectric medium is characterized by a permittivity that depends upon the strength of the electric field. This leads to a capacitance that depends on voltage, which, of course, is never the case for simple dielectric media. For any medium, exotic or not, Eqs (4) and (6) remain valid, since their derivation was based on the work-energy principle and requires no explicit assumption about the dielectric medium. On the other hand, assuming that C =C(x) independent of V or Q is true only for linear dielectrics (and vacuum). In fact, the final expressions (10) or (12) for F would have to be modified for nonlinear media, and it turns out that the wrong result given in Eq. (14) is no longer just in error by a minus sign. (Incidentally, at sufficiently high electric fields, all dielectric media become non-linear, so it is not really accurate to refer to non-linear media as "exotic".)

Optional Material: Connection with thermodynamic functions and Legendre Transformations: Eq.(6) can be written in the following form: W F= , x V where W = W QV . (16) (15)

The function W is known as the Legendre transform of W. Eq. (16), we get dW = dW QdV VdQ . Using dW from Eq. (5), we find that Eq.(17) gives dW = Fdx + QdV

Taking the differential of

(17)

(18)

Note that Eq.(15) follows directly Eq.(18) by using the definition of partial derivatives. The set of equations Eq.(5), (16), (18), and the associated expressions Eq.(4) and (15) have the same structure as the equations for thermodynamic potentials. Recall, for example, that the internal energy function U=U(S,V) satisfies the law of thermodynamics given by (19) dU = TdS PdV . The Legendre transformation to a new function A, called the "Helmholtz free energy," is defined by (20) A = U TS , from which it follows that dA = SdT PdV . From Eq (19) we get U P = V S and from Eq. (21) we get A P = . V T (23) (22) (21)

Eqs (19)-(23) are analogous to Eq.(5), (16), (18), and the associated expressions Eq.(4) and (15). (Note the minus signs on the RHS of Eqs (19), (22), and (23) occur because the definition of pressure P in thermodynamics is that it is the force per unit area exerted by the gas on the walls of the system, as opposed to the force per unit area exerted by the walls on the gas, which would differ by a minus sign since the forces are equal and opposite.) Interpretation of Legendre Transformation as including the external source of energy: The Legendre transformation given by Eq. (16) can be interpreted as follows: For all intents and purposes, W acts as the total energy for a system that includes the battery as part of the system. This contrasts with the original view that the system consists of the

7 dielectric and charged capacitor plates, and that the system can exchange energy with the external world by means of a battery and the external mechanical force F. The new interpretation follows by noting that the work done by the battery equals VdQ, and that for a battery of fixed voltage V, this equals d(QV). It then follows from Eq.(16) that dW = dW d (QV ) = dW dWbattery = d (W Wbattery ) (24)

Eq. (24) states that for purposes of keeping track of energy changes, W acts like the energy of the original system minus the work done by the battery. This is what is to be expected if we imagine the battery to be a large reservoir of charge at fixed voltage V and we incorporate that large reservoir of charge as part of the system. Then the change in the total energy of this new system is the sum of the change of W from the dielectric part and a second contribution equal to the negative of the energy change of the battery or charge reservoir. (The change in energy of the charge reservoir subsystem is dWbattery when the battery does work + dWbattery on the dielectric subsystem.) The same idea holds for the thermodynamic analogy Eq.(23), where we can interpret A as being the energy for a larger system that includes the thermal reservoirs at temperature T. A subtle point is that the second line of Eq.(24) is valid only for processes at constant V, yet we use W for any kind of process or path in the QV-plane. To make sense of the interpretation of incorporating the battery into the new system for processes in which V undergoes a change, one needs to imagine a very large (actually, infinite) set of batteries, each differing from the previous one by an infinitesimal amount dV. Then we connect and disconnect these batteries to our system at each step in the path where our process requires a change in V. (Note that in each infinitesimal step in the process where the battery voltage goes from V to V+dV and the charge goes from Q to dQ, the work done by the battery in each step is VdQ. Therefore, nothing gets lost in the dV jump that accompanies the switch to a new battery or charge reservoir.) In this sense, the statement that W acts as the total energy for a system that includes the battery as part of the system has to be generalized to include the whole set of batteries or charge reservoirs. Again, a similar thing is to be imagined for the thermodynamic analogy Eq.(23), where the new system includes an infinite set of thermal reservoirs at different temperatures T.

You might also like