Solving Differentiating a Streamfunction with Maple Help

  • Context: Maple 
  • Thread starter Thread starter neilgregge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiating Maple
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around differentiating a streamfunction using Maple, specifically the function psi defined as psi=psinought*tanh(y/d)+mu*exp(-((x-L)^2+y^2)/2*sigma^2)*cos(k(y-vt)). The user successfully computed dpsi/dx but encountered confusion with dpsi/dy, particularly with the term D(k)(y-vt). The resolution clarified that Maple applied the chain rule, interpreting k as a function of (y-v*t), which is essential for accurate differentiation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of streamfunctions in fluid dynamics
  • Familiarity with differentiation techniques in calculus
  • Basic knowledge of Maple software for symbolic computation
  • Concept of the chain rule in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore Maple's documentation on differentiation and the chain rule
  • Learn about symbolic computation techniques in Maple
  • Study fluid dynamics principles related to streamfunctions
  • Investigate advanced differentiation methods in calculus
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with fluid dynamics and require assistance with symbolic differentiation in Maple.

neilgregge
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I was set the problem to differentiate the following streamfunction in order to find its x and y velocities:

psi=psinought*tanh(y/d)+mu*exp(-((x-L)^2+y^2)/2*sigma^2)*cos(k(y-vt)).

Being the lazy sort I am, I called in Maple.

dpsi/dx worked out perfectly (in that I got the same answer by hand)

dpsi/dy, however, threw up the following:

dpsi/dy=(psinought/d)*(1-tanh(y/d)^2)-(mu*y/sigma^2)*exp(...)*cos(...)-mu*exp(...)*sin(...)*D(k)(y-vt)


the last term D(k)... makes no sense to me. How can differentiating introduce a new variable?

I know I'm probably being a moron, and I'm certainly no expert in using maple, but anyone who can shine a light in my general direction would be muchly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
neilgregge said:
*cos(k(y-vt))

Should be k*(y-v*t). Maple has to be told explicitly about multiplication.

Maple applied the chain rule. It interpreted the brackets as saying that k is a function evaluated at argument y-v*t.
 
That makes perfect sense. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K