Help Deriving the Navier Stoke's Eq

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter member 428835
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    deriving
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Navier-Stokes equations, focusing on the transition from viscous forces to the term involving the rate of deformation tensor. Participants explore various aspects of fluid dynamics, including the mathematical formulation and physical interpretation of the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on deriving the Navier-Stokes equations from the integral calculus perspective, specifically how to relate viscous forces to the term \(\mu \nabla^2 \vec{V}\).
  • Another participant references Wikipedia to highlight assumptions about fluid nature and incompressibility, suggesting these are critical to the derivation.
  • A participant introduces the viscous force per unit volume as \(\nabla \cdot \vec{\sigma}_v\) and relates it to the rate of deformation tensor \(\vec{E}\), defined as \(\vec{E} = \frac{(\nabla \vec{v}) + (\nabla \vec{v})^T}{2}\).
  • Further inquiries are made regarding the origin and interpretation of the rate of deformation tensor \(\vec{E}\) and the vorticity tensor \(\vec{R}\), with a request for clarification on their roles in fluid dynamics.
  • Another participant expresses interest in the derivation of the Stokes equation, questioning why velocity components \(u\), \(v\), and \(w\) are functions of spatial and temporal variables.
  • A response notes that the x component of velocity \(u\) can depend on other spatial dimensions, providing an example of shear flow to illustrate this point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and seek clarification on specific aspects of the derivation, indicating that multiple viewpoints and uncertainties remain regarding the mathematical relationships and physical interpretations involved in the Navier-Stokes equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention assumptions related to fluid properties, such as incompressibility, which may affect the derivation process. The discussion also touches on the mathematical definitions of tensors, which may not be universally understood among participants.

member 428835
hey pf!

i was hoping one of you could help me with deriving the navier stokes equations. i know the equations state something like this \sum \vec{F}=m\vec{a} and for fluids we have something like this for the forces: \underbrace{-\iint Pd\vec{s}}_{\text{pressure}}+\underbrace{\vec{F}}_{\text{viscous forces}}-\underbrace{\iint \rho\vec{V}\vec{V}\cdot d\vec{s}}_{\text{momentum leaving flux}} and for the acceleration terms we have \underbrace{\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\iiint \rho\vec{V} dv}_{\text{time rate of change of momentum}}

now ultimately we can use the divergence theorem, some vector/tensor identities, and arrive at the navier stokes equation: \rho \frac {D \vec{V}}{Dt} = - \nabla P + \mu \nabla^2 \vec{V}

my question is, can someone please explain to me how to arrive from my \vec{F} viscous force to the \mu \nabla^2 \vec{V}

i'm good with the rest, but I'm just not sure how to start from an integral calculus perspective.

thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
joshmccraney said:
hey pf!

i was hoping one of you could help me with deriving the navier stokes equations. i know the equations state something like this \sum \vec{F}=m\vec{a} and for fluids we have something like this for the forces: \underbrace{-\iint Pd\vec{s}}_{\text{pressure}}+\underbrace{\vec{F}}_{\text{viscous forces}}-\underbrace{\iint \rho\vec{V}\vec{V}\cdot d\vec{s}}_{\text{momentum leaving flux}} and for the acceleration terms we have \underbrace{\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\iiint \rho\vec{V} dv}_{\text{time rate of change of momentum}}

now ultimately we can use the divergence theorem, some vector/tensor identities, and arrive at the navier stokes equation: \rho \frac {D \vec{V}}{Dt} = - \nabla P + \mu \nabla^2 \vec{V}

my question is, can someone please explain to me how to arrive from my \vec{F} viscous force to the \mu \nabla^2 \vec{V}

i'm good with the rest, but I'm just not sure how to start from an integral calculus perspective.

thanks!
The viscous force per unit volume is ∇\centerdot \vec{σ}_v, where \vec{σ}_v is the viscous portion of the stress tensor, and is related to the kinematics of the deformation by
\vec{σ}_v=2μ\vec{E}
where \vec{E} is the rate of deformation tensor:

\vec{E}=\frac{(∇\vec{v})+(∇\vec{v})^T}{2}

In this equation, \vec{v} is the velocity vector.
 
Chestermiller said:
The viscous force per unit volume is ∇\centerdot \vec{σ}_v, where \vec{σ}_v is the viscous portion of the stress tensor, and is related to the kinematics of the deformation by
\vec{σ}_v=2μ\vec{E}
where \vec{E} is the rate of deformation tensor:

\vec{E}=\frac{(∇\vec{v})+(∇\vec{v})^T}{2}

can you explain where \vec{E} comes from and how it relates to the rate of deformation (this is not intuitive to me)? looking at wikipedia it appears we have two matrices; namely the \vec{E} as you have listed and another, they name \vec{R} defined as \vec{R}=\frac{(∇\vec{v})-(∇\vec{v})^T}{2}. I'm just not too sure what is going on or where these two are coming from (\vec{E} and \vec{E} that is)

thanks!
 
joshmccraney said:
can you explain where \vec{E} comes from and how it relates to the rate of deformation (this is not intuitive to me)? looking at wikipedia it appears we have two matrices; namely the \vec{E} as you have listed and another, they name \vec{R} defined as \vec{R}=\frac{(∇\vec{v})-(∇\vec{v})^T}{2}. I'm just not too sure what is going on or where these two are coming from (\vec{E} and \vec{E} that is)

thanks!
The rate of deformation tensor relates to the rate at which the various material points in the fluid separate from one another as the fluid deforms. It's kind of a rate of stretching. The R tensor is the vorticity tensor, which relates to how rapidly fluid elements are rotating in the flow. This rotation does not contribute to the rate of separation of the material points. The relationship between the stress tensor and the rate of deformation tensor (in terms of the viscosity) is the 3D generalization of Newton's law of viscosity, and reduces to Newton's law of viscosity for the case of shear between parallel plates.
 
I have a similar question, but here I'm just interested in the derivation of the Stokes equation (Material Equation, etc):
Where a=dV/dt and V is a vector of d/dt(u,v,w) (i,j,k are respective here). But my fundamental question is why u, v, and w would be functions of (x,y,z,t)? I understand t and x being functions of, say u, because the u is defined as the velocity in the i direction.

Any help is appreciated.
 
j_phillips said:
I have a similar question, but here I'm just interested in the derivation of the Stokes equation (Material Equation, etc):
Where a=dV/dt and V is a vector of d/dt(u,v,w) (i,j,k are respective here). But my fundamental question is why u, v, and w would be functions of (x,y,z,t)? I understand t and x being functions of, say u, because the u is defined as the velocity in the i direction.

Any help is appreciated.

The x component of velocity u can also be a function of y and z. For example, suppose you have a "shear flow" where u=γy, where y is the distance from a horizontal wall, and γ is the "shear rate."
 
That was easy! Thanks much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K