Divergence operator for multi-dimensional neutron diffusion

englisham
Messages
2
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


[1] is the one-speed steady-state neutron diffusion equation, where D is the diffusion coefficient, Φ is the neutron flux, Σa is the neutron absorption cross-section, and S is an external neutron source. Solving this equation using a 'homogeneous' material allows D to be moved in front of the del, leaving a Laplacian [2]. This equation is easily expanded. In the two-dimensional heterogeneous case, the del operates on this coefficient D(x,y). [3] is the form only including the 'streaming' term. Can anyone help me expand this equation? I am applying a Finite Element discretization and will need to integrate over a rectangular spatial domain with a weighted residual to apply my boundary conditions.

Homework Equations


-∇⋅D(r)∇Φ(r) + Σa(r)Φ(r) = S(r) [1]
-DΔΦ(r) + ΣaΦ(r) = S(r) [2]
-∇⋅D(x,y)∇Φ(x,y) [3]

The Attempt at a Solution


-∇⋅D(x,y)∇Φ(x,y) = -∇⋅[D(x,y)(∂Φ/∂x+∂Φ/∂x)] = ?
I cannot figure out the application of the del in this form. Any help or direction to resources is appreciated greatly!
 
  • Like
Likes dRic2
Physics news on Phys.org
\nabla follows the Liebnitz rule for products:
\nabla \cdot( f \nabla g) = (\nabla f) \cdot (\nabla g) + f \nabla^2 g
 
pasmith said:
\nabla follows the Liebnitz rule for products:
\nabla \cdot( f \nabla g) = (\nabla f) \cdot (\nabla g) + f \nabla^2 g

This is exactly the rule I needed, Thank you so much!
So to start:
-∇⋅D(x,y)∇Φ(x,y) [3]

expands to
- (∇⋅D(x,y))⋅(∇Φ(x,y)) - D(x,y)ΔΦ(x,y) [4]

then
- (∂D/∂x+∂D/∂y)⋅(∂Φ/∂x+∂Φ/∂y) - D(x,y)(∂2Φ/∂x2+∂2Φ/∂y2)] [5]

distributing the lefthand term, removing null terms, and reducing to simpler notation leaves
-[DxΦx + DyΦy + D⋅(Φxx + Φyy)] [6]

Combining with [1] and simplifying gives
- D⋅(Φxx + Φyy) - DxΦx - DyΦy + ΣaΦ - S = 0 [7]

Does this look right?
Thanks!
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top