Stress tensor and pressure relationship

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Seyn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fluid dynamic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between stress tensors and pressure in fluid mechanics, specifically referencing Currie's "Fundamental Mechanics of Fluids, Fourth Edition." Participants clarify that the force acting in the x2 direction, represented as P2 = σ12n1, is a component of a vector derived from a normal vector multiplied by a matrix. The confusion arises from the notation used by the author, which oversimplifies the representation of the normal vector, leading to misunderstandings about its components and their significance in stress analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stress tensors in fluid mechanics
  • Familiarity with vector notation and components
  • Knowledge of normal vectors and their applications in physics
  • Basic grasp of matrix operations in the context of vector transformations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of stress vectors from stress tensors in fluid mechanics
  • Learn about the application of normal vectors in stress analysis
  • Explore matrix multiplication as it relates to vector transformations
  • Review advanced topics in fluid mechanics, focusing on stress and strain relationships
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in fluid mechanics, mechanical engineers, and anyone involved in the analysis of stress and pressure relationships in materials and fluids.

Seyn
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
캡처.PNG


I'm studying with Currie's Fundamental Mechanics of Fluids, Fourth edition.
I'm confusing with the above statement; the force acting in the x2 direction is P2=s12n1 which is n1 direction.
Is there anybody help me to understand this subject?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Seyn said:
the force acting in the x2 direction is P2=s12n1 which is n1 direction.
No, ##P_2=\sigma_{12}n_1## is the second component of a vector. That vector is the result of multiplying your original normal vector by a matrix, so can be in an arbitrary direction. Its second component is the component in the direction of your second basis vector.

Note that I think the author has tried to simplify the notation slightly, and I think he's done it in an unhelpful way. The point is that there's a normal vector ##\vec n## which he has chosen to be parallel to the first basis vector, so in component form it is ##(n_1,0,0)^T##. So I'd say that "the unit normal vector ... is ##n_1##" is possibly confusing the issue - ##n_1## is a component of a vector (in this case, the only non-zero component, but still only a component), not a vector itself.
 
Ibix said:
No, ##P_2=\sigma_{12}n_1## is the second component of a vector. That vector is the result of multiplying your original normal vector by a matrix, so can be in an arbitrary direction. Its second component is the component in the direction of your second basis vector.

Note that I think the author has tried to simplify the notation slightly, and I think he's done it in an unhelpful way. The point is that there's a normal vector ##\vec n## which he has chosen to be parallel to the first basis vector, so in component form it is ##(n_1,0,0)^T##. So I'd say that "the unit normal vector ... is ##n_1##" is possibly confusing the issue - ##n_1## is a component of a vector, not a vector itself.
Do you mean the point is,
##\vec{P}=(P_1,P_2,P_3)## and,
##P_j=\sigma_{ij}n_i##
so
##\vec{P}=\sigma_{ij}n_i \hat{e_j}##??
 
Yes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Seyn
Ibix said:
Yes.
Thank you for your kind explanation!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
No problem! You're welcome.
 
You are confused because the result the author gives is wrong. A unit vector in the 1 direction is (1,0,0). The components of the stress vector on the surface of constant x (i.e., 1) are ##P_1=\sigma_{ 11}##, ##P_2=\sigma_{ 12}##, and ##P_3=\sigma_{ 13}##. So the stress vector is ##(P_1,P_2,P_3)=(\sigma_{11},\sigma_{12},\sigma_{13})##
 
Chestermiller said:
You are confused because the result the author gives is wrong. A unit vector in the 1 direction is (1,0,0). The components of the stress vector on the surface of constant x (i.e., 1) are ##P_1=\sigma_{ 11}##, ##P_2=\sigma_{ 12}##, and ##P_3=\sigma_{ 13}##. So the stress vector is ##(P_1,P_2,P_3)=(\sigma_{11},\sigma_{12},\sigma_{13})##
Thanks for the reply. Do you mean the term ##n_i##s are the component of arbitrary surface vector##\vec{n}##, and the author chose an unit vector in the 1 direction as the surface vector for the first example which is ##(1,0,0)##? As a result, because ##n_1=1##, ##n_2=0##, ##n_3=0##, the surface force vector is ##P_j=\sigma_{ij} n_i=(1 \cdot \sigma_{11}+0 \cdot \sigma_{21}+0 \cdot \sigma_{31},1 \cdot \sigma_{12}+0 \cdot \sigma_{22}+0 \cdot \sigma_{23},1 \cdot \sigma_{13}+0 \cdot \sigma_{23}+0 \cdot \sigma_{33})=(\sigma_{11},\sigma_{12},\sigma_{13})##??
 
Seyn said:
Thanks for the reply. Do you mean the term ##n_i##s are the component of arbitrary surface vector##\vec{n}##, and the author chose an unit vector in the 1 direction as the surface vector for the first example which is ##(1,0,0)##? As a result, because ##n_1=1##, ##n_2=0##, ##n_3=0##, the surface force vector is ##P_j=\sigma_{ij} n_i=(1 \cdot \sigma_{11}+0 \cdot \sigma_{21}+0 \cdot \sigma_{31},1 \cdot \sigma_{12}+0 \cdot \sigma_{22}+0 \cdot \sigma_{23},1 \cdot \sigma_{13}+0 \cdot \sigma_{23}+0 \cdot \sigma_{33})=(\sigma_{11},\sigma_{12},\sigma_{13})##??
yes
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K