Title: Electric Field Plotting Part I

PHY 114
Section 11555

Abeer Mousa
Lab Partners: Alysa Baumann, Chelsey Camponeschi

TA: Jianheng Liu

Date of Experiment: February 7, 2011

Abstract

The experiment was designed to determine and understand electric field and equipotential

lines, and the relationship between them in various arrangements of conductors. The two-

dimensional being used is modeled after a three-dimensional system in which parallel plates are

represented as lines, and two dots are representative of two parallel infinite linear electrodes

perpendicular to the plane of the paper. The electric field between two parallel conductors was

found to follow the equation of E = -∆V/∆r. The electric field was found to be 118.5 ± 0.97 V/m.

It was also determined that electric field is perpendicular to equipotential lines and that electric

field is uniform between the “plates”.

Objectives

The purpose of this experiment is to become familiar with electric field, and to determine

the equipotential lines and the corresponding electric field lines for several arrangements of

conductors in a plane.

Procedure

The start the experiment, a sheet of conductive paper with electrodes resembling two

parallel lines was placed on a piece of cork board. It was then connected to a power supply, with

the positive (red) end connecting to the top electrode, and the negative (black) end wire

connected to the bottom electrode. The power supply was connected to a DVM, which was set to

reading 20V in the DC range. The voltage on the power supply was set to 10V. To calculate the

average field between the two parallel linear conductors, a single lead probe was used to measure

the potential of a number of equally space points between the two electrodes. The voltage (V)

versus the distance from the bottom electrode (x) was plotted on Graphical Analysis.

The next step was to plot five equipotential lines between in the two electrodes. This was

done by choosing a point between the plates with the single lead probe. Once a point was chosen,

the probe was moved to the left to find other points of equal magnitude of voltage. For each

original point chosen, four other points of equal voltage were found between the lines and two

were found slightly outside. The points of equal voltage were traced and equipotential lines were

created. This process is repeated four more times to create five equipotential lines. Then, a fixed

space assembly was used to determine the electric field at eight various points. This was done by

placing the middle of the two probes on the point being measured. The voltage was taken and

divided by the distance between the tips of the two probes to determine the electric field at that

point.
 The last part was similar to the previous part, but instead involved a dipole of two dots of

electrodes instead of two lines. Four equipotenial lines were plotted in the same way as above.

The electric field along one of the equipotential lines was then determined by using the fixed

spacing assembly probe. The direction of the electric field was also determined by recording

which way the probes were facing.

Results

Table 1. Electric Field of Parallel Line Electrodes

Theoretical Experimental Value Percent error between Electric Field
Value of E of E from GA experimental and theoretical measured by probe
Electric Field (V/m) 119.75 V/m 118.5 V/m 1.04% 119.75 V/m

Table 2. Electric Field of Parallel Line Electrodes measured by fixed spacing assembly probe
Inside Outside
Electric Field (V/m) -158 -204 -160 -184 -77.8 -88.9 -86.7 -55.6

Table 3. Electric Field of Dipole measured by fixed space assembly probe

Electric Field (V/m) -11.1 -51.1 -88.9 -71.1

See attached Figures 1 and 2 for plots of equipotential lines.

See attached Figure 3 for voltage vs. displacement plot.

Data Analysis and Discussion

In order to calculate the electric field, the following equation was used, where V is the voltage

and r is the displacement.

∆V
E =−
∆r

To calculate the electric field from the probe, the equation above was used. The r value is the

distance between the double probes. An example:

0.71V
E =−
.0045 m
E = −160 V / m
To determine the error in between the theoretical value of the electric field and the experimental

value as determined by the Graphical Analysis, the following equation was used.

| expected value – experimental value |x100% / expected value

= |119.75 V/m – 118.5 V/m |x100% / 119.75 V/m
= 1.04%

In Graphical Analysis, the experimental value of the electric field was determined by the taking

various points of the voltage measured and the distance and plotting them. The slope, which turned

out to be 118.5 ± .97 V/m represents the electric field between the two lines, or the “plates”. The

theoretical value between the plates was determined by measuring the potential difference between

the two plates using the DVM and measuring the separation between the lines using a ruler. The

theoretical electric field, 119.75 V/m, was determined by dividing the voltage (9.58 V) by the

distance (.08 m). The percent error between the theoretical and experimental electric fields was

calculated to be 1.04%. The potential along the lines (“plates”) was found to follow an

equipotential line. The electric field at various points was measured directly using a fixed spacing

probe assembly. The voltage measured at that point was divided by the distance between the

probes. The values of the electric fields at those eight points varied. They were near, but no very

close to the electric field determined by the plot of V versus x. However, the electric fields

measured all pointed down, from the positive electrode to the negative one. These field lines were

perpendicular to the equipotential lines plotted. The direction of the electric field just on the

surface of the positive conductor was found to be perpendicular and facing down towards the

negative plate. This is consistent with the knowledge about conductors, because the charge of the

conductor should be uniform along its surface. The electric field between the two plates was found

to be fairly uniform between the two plates. Outside of the plates, the magnitude of the electric

fields measured decreased, but the direction was still perpendicular to the equipotential lines. In the
case of the dipole, the equipotential lines and the electric field along one of the lines was

measured. The equipotential lines were found to create circles around the dipoles. The magnitudes

of the electric field along one of the equipotential line of the negative electrode varied. However,

the directions of the electric fields were all perpendicular to the equipotenial line and pointed

towards the negative dipole. This means that the electric fields points from a positive charge

towards a negative charge.

There were various sources of error in this experiment. A possible systematic source of

error could be from both the DC power supply and the digital voltmeter. The limitations of the

machines could contribute to a less precise measurement. For instance, when the power supply was

placed at 10 V, the potential difference between the electrodes measured by the probe was 9.58 V.

This could also be due to the slightly imprecise placing of the lines on the sheet and/or the placing

of the power supply on the electrodes. Also, some error could arise from the measurement of the

voltage. The potential difference between the two points being measured could be altered by some

other items around the paper that could affect the electric field. More trials at each point would

reduce the random nature of each measurement.

Conclusion

Conducting the experiment allowed for the objective to be fulfilled of determining the

equipotential lines and the corresponding electric field lines for an arrangement of conductors. It

was determined that electric field lines are always perpendicular to the equipotential lines. Also,

the direction of the electric field always pointed from the positve charge towards the negatively

charged conductor. It was also determined that the electric potential is linearly proportional to

the distance being measured. This indicates that the electric field between the two “plate”

conductors remains constant, and is therefore uniform.