Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
EonStrife

Question about Divergence Operation (del . u==u . del ?)

This topic is 3976 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hi, I have a question about the del operator (which is upside down delta). It's a vector containing incomplete partial differential, isn't it ? del = (d/dx, d/dy, d/dz) As for the divergece, it's a dot product... suppose we have v = (vx, vy, vz), then del . v = dvx/dx + dvy/dy + dvz/vz My question, is, is del . v = v . del ? I wonder, since I found navier stokes equation : du/dt = -(u . del)u - v del^2 u + del p + f And, to make it divergence free, we have the second equation : del . u = 0 For now, I think that del . u is same as u . del, doesn't that make the navier-stokes equation become : du/dt = - v del^2 + del p + f ??? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
No, they aren't...
If I assume that u = (ux, uy, uz)
then
[ du/dt = -(u . del)u - v del^2 u + del p + f ]
=
[-((ux, uy, uz).d/dx ux + (ux, uy, uz).d/dy uy + (yx, uy, uz).d/dz uz) - v del^2 u + .... ]

Dot product itself is commutative, However, the case here is different as del 'operator' should be given a vector/magnitude to 'operate' on.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Darkstrike
The del.v notation is a formalism, you should not expect it to behave well.


This statement makes no sense.

To the OP: v is a scalar-valued function of x, y, and z. So is del.v.

v.del is a derivative operator, so it is not a scalar-valued function. This means del.v and v.del are not the same.

v.del is typically seen when computing directional derivatives of a function f(x,y,z). (v.del)f is the derivative of f in the (unit-length) direction v.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, thanks guys, now I understand...then, v.del is an derivative operator, and it still needs something on the right hand side to operate...Then, that means :

(u.del)u = u . del u = del u . u ?

Then, I think that it's correct to assume that the first term in Navier Stokes equation is :
-(u . del u)

However, to ensure incompressibility (divergence free) in Navier Stokes equation, we use this equation : del . u = 0, thus, still make the first term of Navier Stokes becomes zero...

[Edited by - EonStrife on September 30, 2007 2:32:41 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Dave Eberly
Quote:
Original post by Darkstrike
The del.v notation is a formalism, you should not expect it to behave well.


This statement makes no sense.

del.v is not actually a dot product of a vector del and a vector v, so commutativity of the dot product does not imply that del.v=v.del. Does this sound better now?

edit:
Quote:
Original post by Dave Eberly
To the OP: v is a scalar-valued function of x, y, and z. So is del.v.

The OP's notation v = (vx, vy, vz) suggests that v is not a function, but rather a vector (or a 1-form, but then del v would be a two-form, not a function).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, I'm sorry for the equation above...
It should be : -(ux d/dx u + uy d/dy u + uz d/dz u) - v del^2 u + del p + f
as
-(u.del) = -[(ux d/dx) + (uy d/dy) + (uz d/dz)]

the rest is correct...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@yehdev_cc
Hmm...ok, divergence works on velocity field...
Suppose given a velocity field : u = x^3yi + yzj+ xz^2i

So, div.u will become : d(x^3y)/dx + d(yz)/dy + d(xz^2)/dz = 3x^2y + z + 2xz

and about, -(u.div)u, from my understanding, it'll be like this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v708/EonStrife/del.jpg

Am I correct? Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Darkstrike
del.v is not actually a dot product of a vector del and a vector v, so commutativity of the dot product does not imply that del.v=v.del. Does this sound better now?


No. The dot product is used in a *formal* manner, so I would say that del.v is the dot product of a vector del and a vector v. In this manner, commutativity is not part of the discussion. The property of commutativity is associated with the definition of dot product of n-tuples whose components are scalar values.

Quote:

The OP's notation v = (vx, vy, vz) suggests that v is not a function, but rather a vector (or a 1-form, but then del v would be a two-form, not a function).


My error, and for hastily posting late at night. Yes, v is a vector-valued function (of a vector-valued variable).

del. is a differential operator that applies to vector fields v : R^n ->R^n. The result of application, del.v, is a scalar-valued function del.v : R^n -> R.

v.del is a differential operator that applies to scalar-valued functions u : R^n -> R. The result of application, (v.del)u, is a scalar-valued function (v.del)u : R^n -> R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!