PHYS1101 – Advanced Physics

Varsha Venkatesh and William Jackson

29 May, 2009.

Abstract
This experiment examined the effect of the changing length of a resistor wire on the
current flowing through the wire. The current flowing through the wire was measured
for different lengths of wire keeping the voltage and cross sectional area constant. It
was expected that the current flowing through the wire would vary inversely with the
length of the wire. This was verified by plotting the current-length graph. The value of
current per unit length was found from the slope of the graph to be -0.287 ± 0.056
A/m. This agrees with the theoretical value of 0.218 A/m.

Introduction and Background Theory

In 1820, Oersted found that when an electric field is passed through a wire, a
magnetic needle placed near it shows a deflection. The angle through which the
needle deflects varies with the magnitude of the current in the wire. Oersted
concluded that an electric current flowing through a conductor produces a magnetic
field in the surrounding space which causes the deflection of the magnetic needle [1].

The resistance of a wire is directly proportional to the length of the wire [2].

R=ρ*L/A

Also, the current flowing through the wire is inversely proportional to the resistance
of the wire (Ohm’s Law) [3].

V=I*R

Hence, if the length of the wire is doubled, the resistance doubles and the current
halves. This in turn causes the magnetic field to halve and therefore angle of
deflection of a magnetic needle placed near it, halves.

The following experiment uses identical wires of different lengths to verify that the
current flowing through a wire varies inversely with the length of the wire. It also
verifies that the angle of deflection of the magnetic needle in a compass varies
inversely with the length of the wire.

Experimental Method
A piece of Nichrome wire with no significant kinks in it was taken and its length was
measured using a metre scale. The measured length was noted down. The insulation
covering the ends of the wire was shaved off using a piece of sand paper. The wire
was then connected in series with a multimeter and a 1.5 volt battery (Figure 1). The
magnitude of the current measured by the multimeter was noted down. As the
 multimeter reading was fluctuating, the reading was taken to be the approximate
average of the shifting readings. The uncertainty was calculated by subtracting the
extreme values from the approximate average.

Figure 2 + -
Figure 1
+ -
Multimeter

Resistor
A

Resistor Compass
Next, the multimeter was removed and the wire was connected to the battery alone. A
compass was placed near the wire (Figure 2) and the angle of deflection produced was
noted down. As the compass needle was not fluctuating, the uncertainty was
calculated by taking half the value of each division on the compass. The same method
was used to determine the uncertainty in the length of the wire.

Then, the wire was placed along the metre scale and cut such that the new length was
0.1 metres less than the old one. The steps were repeated for the new length of wire
and the readings were noted in a tabular form. This process was continued until the
length of the wire became less than 0.1 metre.

The value of current per unit length was calculated from the graph of length versus
current and the value of deflection angle per unit length was calculated from the
length versus angle of deflection graph.

Results and Analysis

The cross sectional area of the wire was 1.6 * 10 -6 m 2.
The resistivity of Nichrome is 1.1 * 10 -6 Ω m.
The readings taken for different lengths of wire are in the table below:

Serial Length (m) Current (A) Deflection Angle

Number (degrees)
1 0.7710 ± 0.0005 1.85 ± 0.05 60 ± 2.5
2 0.6710 ± 0.0005 1.88 ± 0.02 60 ± 2.5
3 0.5710 ± 0.0005 1.95 ± 0.03 35 ± 2.5
4 0.4710 ± 0.0005 1.99 ± 0.02 40 ± 2.5
5 0.3710 ± 0.0005 1.93 ± 0.03 40 ± 2.5
6 0.2710 ± 0.0005 1.96 ± 0.03 45 ± 2.5
7 0.1710 ± 0.0005 2.02 ± 0.04 50 ± 2.5
8 0.0710 ± 0.0005 2.08 ± 0.02 50 ± 2.5

The graph for current versus length was plotted:

  
C u rre n t A m p e re s

2 .0 5

2 .0 0

1 .9 5

1 .9 0

1 .8 5

1 .8 0

0 .2 0 .4 0 .6

L en g th m

The value of current per unit length was found from the slope of the graph to be
- 0.287 ± 0.056 Amperes / metre. This value is a constant for a wire of given material
and cross sectional area and is proportional to voltage * area / resistivity.

The negative sign in the value of current per unit length indicates that the current was
flowing in the direction opposite to the one that was taken. The relatively small
uncertainty in this value implies that the readings taken were precise. The graph also
agrees with the expected trend that current decreases as the length increases. The
discrepancies in the readings were probably due to the wire being in contact with skin
or the table.

The current per unit length of an ideal Nichrome wire of cross sectional area 1.6 mm
2
, resistivity 1.1 * 10 -6 Ω m, connected to a 1.5 volt battery is 0.218 A / m. This
condition is similar to that of the experiment. Hence, the theoretical value of current
per unit length agrees with the experimental value.

The experiment can be improved by using a wire made from a material with a lower
resistivity such as copper or aluminium. This will give a larger value of current per
unit length and hence a larger difference in current for small differences in length.

Next, the graph for deflection angle versus length was plotted:
  
D e fl e c t i o n A n g l e d e g r e e s
60

55

50

45

40

35

0 .2 0 .4 0 .6

L en g th m

The value of angle of deflection per unit length was found from the slope of the graph
to be -10.714 ± 14.797 degrees / metre. This value is a constant for a wire of given
material and cross sectional area.

The negative sign in the value indicates the direction in which the current was
flowing. The large uncertainty in this value implies that the readings taken were
inaccurate and that external factors influenced them. This was probably due to
external factors such as the battery being too close to the compass. The graph
however, agrees with the expected trend that angle of deflection decreases as the
length increases.

The deflection in the compass is maximized when the wire is running from the earth’s
magnetic north to south or vice versa. The angle of deflection also depends inversely
on the distance of the compass from the wire. This value for the wire of length 0.2710
± 0.0005 m is much lower than the expected. This is probably due to the above-given
reasons.

Conclusions
The experimental value of current per unit length agrees with the theoretical value.
However, the angle of deflection per unit length had too large an uncertainty to
provide a definite value.

References
[1]
A Textbook of Physics Standard 11, p 280, S. Y. Gambhir, April 2008.
[2]
Matter and Interactions II – Electric and Magnetic Interactions, p 671, Chabay and
Sherwood, 2007.
[3]
Introduction to Electrodynamics, p 285, David J, Griffiths and c. Inglefield, 1999.