Strain Tensor Based on Clifford Algebra

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arash1950
  • Start date Start date
Arash1950
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Let u=u_i e_i be the displacement field of a continuum body. Then the displacement gradient tensor H based on classical formulation is given by H=grad u = u_{i,j} e_i \otimes e_j, where \otimes represents tensor product.H is decomposed intro two parts. Namely, H=epsilon+Omega. The infinitesimal strain tensor is given by epsilon=(H+H^t)/2, where H^t=transose(H). In component form, we have epsilon_{ij}=(u_{i,j}+u_{j,i})/2. On the other hand, Omega=(H-H^t)/2 describes the rigid body rotation during deformation.

In Clifford analysis, the gradient operator (known as the Dirac operator) is defined as D=e_i \partial / \partial x_i. The displacement gradient MAY be written as H=Du=D.u+D^u (I think this is incorrect).

The first term is indeed D.u=div u that describes the dilatation (volume change).The second term is similar to curl(u) that describes rigid body rotation [it is related to Omega. Basically curl(u) is twice the axial vector of Omega].

I have also seen relations of the form epsilon=(Du+uD)/2, which is absolutely incorrect. indeed (Du+uD)/2=div u=trace(epsilon)

It seems that the gradient operator in Clifford analysis cannot produce the strain tensor in elasticity. Probably, a dyadic product of the form H=D \otimes u is needed. But as far as I know, this product is not standard in Clifford analysis.

I have not seen any good relation in papers and books. Moreover, ChatGPT was not able to provide useful information.

My questions:

  • How to generate epsilon_{ij}=(u_{i,j}+u_{j,i})/2 based on the gradient operation in Clifford analysis?
  • What is the general definition of the Gradient operator in Clifford analysis? It seems that the Dirac operator "D", as mentioned above, does not work properly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you please reformat your post to make it more readable? You can use double hash-marks (##) before and after your inline LaTeX expressions to render them. For more info, open the "LaTeX Guide" link at the bottom-left of the editing window.
 
I'm a bit confused by the conditions on the existence of coordinate basis given by Frobenius's theorem. Namely, let's take a n-dimensional smooth manifold and a set of n smooth vector fields defined on it. Suppose they are pointwise linearly independent and do commute each other (i.e. zero commutator/Lie bracket). That means they span the entire tangent space at any point and since commute, they define a local coordinate basis. What does this mean? Well, starting from any point on the...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K