Integrate divergence of a vector over an area

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on applying the divergence theorem to integrate a vector field over a surface in a solid mechanics context. The user successfully computes the integral using both the divergence theorem and direct area integration, ultimately confirming that the accepted solution is 1/2. Key vector field components are defined, including n1 = -e2, n2 = 0.707(e1 + e2), and n3 = -e1. The user resolves confusion regarding integration methods and confirms the necessity of multiplying by √2 in the surface area term.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the divergence theorem in vector calculus
  • Familiarity with surface integrals and line integrals
  • Basic knowledge of vector fields and their components
  • Proficiency in calculus, particularly integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the divergence theorem in detail, focusing on practical applications
  • Practice solving surface and line integrals in vector calculus
  • Explore the relationship between vector fields and their divergence
  • Learn about the geometric interpretation of integrals in solid mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in engineering, particularly those studying solid mechanics, as well as mathematicians and physicists interested in vector calculus and integration techniques.

JMoody
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hello, I'm hoping somebody can give me some insight on how to solve this problem. This was a solid mechanics exam question and I wasn't able to finish it because I'm rather weak in math.

1. Homework Statement

WOxeM7f.jpg


Homework Equations


Recall divergence theorem for part ii. ∫div(V)dA = ∫V⋅ndS where n is normal to the surface.

The Attempt at a Solution


Part i.
Not an issue, I can solve it easily.

Part ii.
I can apply divergence theorem no problem.
For the n vector field I get:
n1 = -e2
n3 = -e1
n2 = .707(e1 + e2)

The problem is that I've been out of school for quite a while, and I can't remember how to successfully integrate over the surface (perimeter) now. I realize I need to break it up into parts for each line of the surface, but it's been years since I've taken calculus.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
For c1, you will have ##\int_0^1 V\cdot n_1 \, dx_1##.
For c3, you will have ##\int_0^1 V\cdot n_2 \, dx_2 ##.
For c2, it gets a little tougher.
##\int_{c2} V\cdot n_2 dc2##
 
For c2, should I do a double integral (x1 and x2, both from 0 to 1) of V⋅n2?
 
It might be easier to directly compute the Area integral
##\int_0^1 \int_0^{1-x_1} div(V) dx_2dx_1 ##
 
JMoody said:
For c2, should I do a double integral (x1 and x2, both from 0 to 1) of V⋅n2?
I don't think that is right, you would be taking the integral over an area. you want the integral over the line.
 
Thanks RUber, I think you've provided the help I needed to finish it. It was required to perform divergence theorem for the exam though, I'll give it a shot with both methods and see how the solutions compare.
 
RUber said:
It might be easier to directly compute the Area integral
##\int_0^1 \int_0^{1-x_1} div(V) dx_2dx_1 ##
Nevermind this...that doesn't make any sense.
---
Try integrating over x1, and define x2 in terms of x1 along the line. That should do the trick.
 
I solved it, I get 1/2 using both methods. Thanks again for the help RUber, it helped set me on the write path.
 
When I worked it out, I still had the ##\frac 1 {\sqrt{2}}## in the answer.
 
  • #10
I'm not sure where the square root comes from, but I believe the accepted solution was 1/2 when we went over the exam (he just didn't take the time to go over something trivial like integration since most of my peers are coming straight out of undergrad >.<). I calculated it both by using divergence theorem to integrate over the line (more complicated) and by integrating the divergence over the area directly.
FmqC9lS.jpg
 
  • #11
Aha, I forgot to multiply by the ##\sqrt{2}## in the dS term.
Good work.
 
  • #12
Why (in post #7) "Nevermind this...that doesn't make any sense." ?
I thought I had div V = 3x2 and that would be a simple integral, so I'm grossly overlooking sonething ?
 
  • #13
Thanks BvU, I was clearly overthinking things and convinced myself I was wrong.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K