Shell balances in cylindrical coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formulation of a shell balance in cylindrical coordinates within the context of transport phenomena. Participants explore the differences in dividing by volume in cylindrical control volumes compared to Cartesian coordinates, particularly focusing on the implications for the resulting ordinary differential equations (ODEs).

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the division in cylindrical coordinates is by 2.pi.DelR.L instead of 2.pi.R.DelR.L, which represents the volume of the control volume.
  • Another participant suggests that dividing by 2.pi.r.DelR.L is also valid and asserts that it does not change the final result, implying a preference for aesthetic reasons in the original formulation.
  • A subsequent participant argues that the choice of division does affect the final answer obtained from integrating the resulting ODE.
  • Another participant requests clarification on how the two versions of the ODE would differ based on the division method used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the impact of the division method on the final results of the ODEs, with some asserting that it does not change the outcome while others believe it does. The discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Uncertainty exists regarding the assumptions made in the derivation of the ODEs and the implications of different division methods on the results. The discussion does not clarify these assumptions or the specific context of the transport phenomena being analyzed.

Muhammad Waleed Khan
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I have a question regarding writing a shell balance for a cylindrical system with transport in one direction (in any area of transport phenomena). When we set up the conservation equation(say steady state), we multiply the flux and the area at the surfaces of our control volume and plug them into the eqn. Afterwards I believe that we divide the resulting equation by the volume of the control volume before taking the limit as DelX,DelZ or DelR approaches 0. In cartesian coordinates we divide this by delXdelYdelZ, but why in cylindrical CV do we divide by 2.pi.DelR.L instead of 2.pi.R.DelR.L (which is the volume of our CV)?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Muhammad Waleed Khan said:
I have a question regarding writing a shell balance for a cylindrical system with transport in one direction (in any area of transport phenomena). When we set up the conservation equation(say steady state), we multiply the flux and the area at the surfaces of our control volume and plug them into the eqn. Afterwards I believe that we divide the resulting equation by the volume of the control volume before taking the limit as DelX,DelZ or DelR approaches 0. In cartesian coordinates we divide this by delXdelYdelZ, but why in cylindrical CV do we divide by 2.pi.DelR.L instead of 2.pi.R.DelR.L (which is the volume of our CV)?
Of course, you could also divide by ##2\pi r \Delta r L##. That won't change the final result. But, the authors must of thought it was more convenient and aesthetically pleasing to do it their way. Both ways are right.
 
Chestermiller said:
Of course, you could also divide by ##2\pi r \Delta r L##. That won't change the final result. But, the authors must of thought it was more convenient and aesthetically pleasing to do it their way. Both ways are right.
Yeah but it changes the final answer you get from integrating the resulting ODE.
 
Muhammad Waleed Khan said:
Yeah but it changes the final answer you get from integrating the resulting ODE.
Please show me how you think the answer will be different. Start out by showing me the two versions of the ODE that you get.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
10K