How Do You Calculate Surface Integrals for Vector Fields?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on calculating surface integrals for vector fields using Stoke's theorem. The first problem involves evaluating the flux of a constant vector field \(\vec v = v_0\hat k\) through a hemispherical surface, where the curl is zero, confirming that the integral evaluates to zero without needing surface evaluation. The second problem examines the vector field \(\vec A = y\hat i + z\hat j + x\hat k\) over a paraboloid defined by \(z = 1 - x^2 - y^2\), where the curl is calculated as \(\vec \nabla \times \vec A = -1(\hat i + \hat j + \hat k)\). The procedure for evaluating the surface integral involves using the normal vector derived from the gradient of the level surface.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically surface integrals and curl operations.
  • Familiarity with Stoke's theorem and its application in vector fields.
  • Knowledge of parametric equations and polar coordinates for integration.
  • Ability to compute gradients and dot products in three-dimensional space.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Stoke's theorem in various vector field scenarios.
  • Learn how to compute surface integrals over different geometric shapes, including paraboloids and hemispheres.
  • Explore the use of polar coordinates in double integrals for surface area calculations.
  • Investigate the implications of curl and divergence in fluid dynamics and electromagnetism.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with vector fields and surface integrals, particularly those seeking to deepen their understanding of Stoke's theorem and its applications.

Reshma
Messages
749
Reaction score
6
I have two problems on surface integrals.

1] I have a constant vector [itex]\vec v = v_0\hat k[/itex]. I have to evaluate the flux of this vector field through a curved hemispherical surface defined by [itex]x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2[/itex], for z>0. The question says use Stoke's theorem.

Stoke's theorem suggests:
[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec v\right) \cdot d\vec a = \int_p \vec v \cdot d\vec l[/tex]

But the curl of this vector comes out to be zero . Am I going right? How is the surface integral evaluated?

2] I have a vector field [itex]\vec A = y\hat i + z\hat j + x\hat k[/itex]. I have to find the value of the surface integral:
[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a[/tex]

The surface S here is a paraboloid defined by:
[tex]z = 1 - x^2 - y^2[/tex]

I evaluated the curl and it comes out to be:
[tex]\vec \nabla \times \vec A = -1\left(\hat i + \hat j + \hat k\right)[/tex]

I need help here on the procedure to evaluate the surface integral.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Reshma said:
I have two problems on surface integrals.

1] I have a constant vector [itex]\vec v = v_0\hat k[/itex]. I have to evaluate the flux of this vector field through a curved hemispherical surface defined by [itex]x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2[/itex], for z>0. The question says use Stoke's theorem.

Stoke's theorem suggests:
[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec v\right) \cdot d\vec a = \int_p \vec v \cdot d\vec l[/tex]

But the curl of this vector comes out to be zero . Am I going right? How is the surface integral evaluated?
Not , :biggrin: ! The integral of 0 over any volume is 0 so you have the answer right in front of you! Since you are using Stoke's theorem, you don't need to evaluate the surface integral.

2] I have a vector field [itex]\vec A = y\hat i + z\hat j + x\hat k[/itex]. I have to find the value of the surface integral:
[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a[/tex]

The surface S here is a paraboloid defined by:
[tex]z = 1 - x^2 - y^2[/tex]

I evaluated the curl and it comes out to be:
[tex]\vec \nabla \times \vec A = -1\left(\hat i + \hat j + \hat k\right)[/tex]

I need help here on the procedure to evaluate the surface integral.
You probably have a formula for [itex]d\vec a[/itex] but here is how I like to think about it: The surface is given by z= 1- x2- y2 which is the same as x2+ y2+ z= 1. We can think of that as a "level surface" of the function f(x,y,z)= x2+y2+ z. The gradient of that: 2xi+ 2yj+ k is normal to the surface and, since it is "normalized" to the xy-plane in the sense that the k component is 1, [itex]d\vec a= (2xi+ 2yj+ k)dxdy[/itex].
Take the dot product of that with -(i+ j+ k) to get the integrand. You don't say over what region of the paraboloid that is to be integrated. If it is over the region above z= 0, then projected into the xy-plane, you have the circle x2+ y2= 1. Integrate over that circle. It will probably be simplest to do it in polar coordinates.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you very, very much! o:)

[tex]\left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a = -\left(2x + 2y + 1\right)dxdy[/tex]

The region of integration is over z>0. Just a little doubt...will the projected region on the xy-plane be a circle even if z>0?

[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a = -\int_0^1 \int_0^1 \left(2x + 2y + 1\right)dxdy[/tex]

[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a = -\int_0^1 \int_0^1 \left(2xdx + 2ydx + 1dx\right)dy[/tex]

[tex]\int_s \left(\vec \nabla \times \vec A\right) \cdot d\vec a = -2\int_0^1 (1+y)dy[/tex]

Evaluation of this gives me: -3
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K