How Does Stokes' Theorem Relate to Vorticity in Fluid Dynamics?

coverband
Messages
170
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Consider an imaginary circular disc, of radius R, whose arbitrary orientation is described by the unit vector, \vec {n}, perpendicular to the plane of the disc. Define the component, in the direction \vec {n}, of the angular velocity, \vec {\Omega}, at a point in the fluid by \vec {\Omega}. \vec {n} = \lim_{R \rightarrow 0}[\frac {1}{2 \pi R^2} \oint_C \vec {u}.dl], where C denotes the the boundary (rim) of the disc. Use Stokes' theorem, and the arbitrariness of \vec {n}, to show that \vec {\Omega}= \frac {1}{2} \vec {\omega}, where \vec {\omega} = \nabla * \vec {u} is the vorticity of the fluid at R=0. [This definition is based on a description applicable to the rotation of solid bodies. Confirm this by considering \vec {u} = \vec {U} + \vec {\Omega}* \vec{r}, where \vec {U} is the translational velocity of the body, \vec {\Omega} is its angular velocity and \vec {r} is the position vector of a point relative to a point on the axis of rotation.]


Homework Equations


Stokes' theorem : \oint_c u.dl = \iint_S (\nabla * u) .n ds


The Attempt at a Solution


Either 1.:
C is boundary of x^2 + y^2 = R^2. Parametrically x= Rcost, y = Rsint
dx = -Rsintdt, dy = Rcostdt
L.H.S. of Stokes becomes \oint_c udx + vdy + wdz
= \oint_C -uRSintdt + vRCostdt
=\int_{0}^{2 \pi} -uRSint dt + vRCost dt
=uRCost + vRSint \right]_{0}^{2 \pi}
= -uR - uR
=-2uR
multiply term outside integral
=-\frac{u}{\pi R}

Or 2:
\frac {1}{2} (\nabla * \vec {u}). \vec {n} = \lim_{R \rightarrow 0}[\frac {1}{2 \pi R^2} \iint_S (\nabla * u) .n ds ], ...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


[ Nevermind :) .. I was wrong. ]
 


Start with this

<br /> \vec {\Omega}. \vec {n} = \lim_{R \rightarrow 0}[\frac {1}{2 \pi R^2} \oint_C \vec {u}.dl] <br />

then use Stokes theorem and get in the limit R \rightarrow 0

<br /> \vec {\Omega}. \vec {n} = \lim_{R \rightarrow 0}[\frac {1}{2 \pi R^2} \iint_S (\nabla * u) .n ds ] = \lim_{R \rightarrow 0}[\frac {1}{2 \pi R^2} (\nabla * u) \pi R^2 ] = 0.5 \nabla * u<br />
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top