1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Eulerian description

  1. Dec 17, 2008 #1
    I am having some trouble understanding some things about the Eulerian description of a continuum.

    Suppose we have a fluid that is continuously deforming and moving in time. If x are the spatial coordinates that the fluid is passing through, t is time, and p is a scalar function p(x,t), for example density, then for a path [itex]\gamma(t)[/itex] through space the chain rule gives,

    [tex]\frac{d}{dt}\rho = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \dot{\gamma} \cdot \nabla \rho[/tex]

    for the derivative of p in along the path [itex]\gamma[/itex].

    So far so good. But then, multiple sources I have read make the jump to the following statement without justification: In general (not on a path),

    [tex]\frac{d}{dt}\rho = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + v \cdot \nabla \rho[/tex]

    where v is the velocity of the fluid at that point x and time t. This seems nonsensical though. If p(x,t) really describes the exact density at a spatial point x and time t, then shouldn't we simply have [itex]\frac{d\rho}{dt} = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}[/itex]? In the Eulerian description, isn't x just a static point in space? Plus, what is the fluid velocity v doing in there?

    I've been stuck on this for several hours, and I'm pretty sure there's an important but subtle point I'm missing.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 17, 2008 #2

    Andy Resnick

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Eulerian coordinates co-move with the material. As a result, when evaluating how the material deforms or flows, the problem essentially reduces to a comparison of how the local coordinate system has deformed. Usually, to avoid confusion, authors write out the 'original' coordinates in capital letters: (X,Y,Z) and the deformed coordinates in lowercase: (x,y,z). Also, the material derivative is written as D/Dt rather than d/dt. Unfortunately, a side-effect (IMO) is entirely too many different symbols.

    So, in your question- in the Eulerian description, X is static, but x is not, so d[f(x,t)]/dt must be expanded by the chain rule, resulting in the material derivative.

    Does that help? It's worthwhile to spend the time understanding this.
     
  4. Dec 17, 2008 #3
    So, ok let me see if I understand. Would it be a correct interpretation to say that the material derivative of some function p, (Dp/Dt)(x,t), measures the rate of change of p along the flow of a particular particle crossing through x at time t?

    For example, suppose you drop a bunch of thermometers into a river, all over the place. Then as time progresses the thermometers will flow with the river, tracing out trajectories in space. Further, you could make a graph of temperature against time for each thermometer, as it moves around. Then pick a point in the river x and a time t, and find the closest thermometer (they are all over the place so this should be no problem (-: ). The material derivative at x,t is the slope of the closest thermometer's temperature vs time graph, at time t.

    Written another way, pick some x,t. If the deformation is 1-1, then this x,t corresponds to a unique reference place X. The particle starting at X traces out a path [itex]\gamma[/itex] with velocity v, starting at X and passing through x at time t. We have already seen that the rate of change of p as measured by an observer traveling along a path [itex]\gamma[/itex] is given by,

    [tex]
    \frac{D}{Dt}\rho = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \dot{\gamma} \cdot \nabla \rho
    [/tex]

    but here [itex]\dot{\gamma}=v[/itex], so we have

    [tex]
    \frac{D}{Dt}\rho = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + v \cdot \nabla \rho
    [/tex]

    Is this the right way of thinking?
     
  5. Dec 17, 2008 #4

    Andy Resnick

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    I think you are close. The function p varies both in space and time, say 'the weather', for example. Then the first term of
    [tex] \frac{D}{Dt}\rho = \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + v \cdot \nabla \rho [/tex]

    corresponds to you sitting on the ground and the weather changing. The second term corresponds to you getting in a car or airplane and going somewhere else.

    Going with your thermometer analogy, becasue the thermometers are moving in the river, asking how T(x,t) varies means keeping track both of how x varies (x = x(X,t)) as well as t.

    How's that?
     
  6. Dec 19, 2008 #5
    Thank you, I understand now.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?