1
$\begingroup$

In this paper it's described the solution of the damped wave equation in cylindrical coordinates

$$ \nabla^2\left(c^2\rho_1+\nu\frac{\partial\rho_1}{\partial t}\right)-\frac{\partial^2\rho_1}{\partial t^2}=0$$

where $\rho_1$ is the difference of the density relative to the unperturbed state $\rho_0$.

The applied boundary condition is

$$ \mathbf{v}\big|_{r=r_0}=v_A\cos(\omega t)\mathbf{\hat{r}}$$

where $v$ is the velocity of the fluid.

They claim that this boundary condition can we rewritten as

\begin{equation} \frac{\partial\rho_1}{\partial r} \bigg|_{r=r_0}=\frac{\rho_0v_A\omega c^2}{\nu^2\omega^2+c^4}\sin(\omega t)-\frac{\rho_0v_A\omega^2 \nu}{\nu^2\omega^2+c^4}\cos(\omega t)\tag{1} \end{equation}

just imposing $\nabla\times \mathbf{v}=\mathbf{0}$ and using the equations for the conservation of mass and momentum

$$ \frac{\partial\rho_1}{\partial t} + \nabla\cdot(\rho_0 \mathbf{v}) =0$$ $$ \frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\rho_0 \mathbf{v})+c^2\nabla\rho_1+\nabla \cdot \mathbf{D}_1=\mathbf{0}$$

where $\mathbf{D}_1$ is the viscous stress tensor.

It is possible to prove that, if $\nabla\times \mathbf{v}=0$, then $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{D}_1 = -\nu\nabla^2\mathbf{v} $.

I tried hard but I've not been able to prove equation $(1)$. Do you know how to proceed?

Reference:

Euan McLeoda and Craig B. Arnold, Mechanics and refractive power optimization of tunable acoustic gradient lenses, Journal of Applied Physics 2007 102:3

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How could a vectorial expression be equal to a scalar expression? There are several equations which do not make sense. See for example the last equation. $\endgroup$ – Cham Dec 14 '18 at 18:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Cham I don't see any equality between a scalar and a vector. Which are the expression that do not make sense in your opinion? Please also note that the one you are rading here are exactly the same of the paper. $\endgroup$ – Alessandro Zunino Dec 14 '18 at 18:13
  • $\begingroup$ Your last equation reads $\nabla \cdot \boldsymbol{\mathrm{D}}_1 = -\nu \nabla^2 \boldsymbol{\mathrm{v}}$. The left member is a scalar (divergence of vector $\boldsymbol{\mathrm{D}}_1$). The right member is a vector (laplacian of vector $\boldsymbol{\mathrm{v}}$). $\endgroup$ – Cham Dec 14 '18 at 18:19
  • $\begingroup$ @Cham The left member is a vector, sorry. The divergence operator decreases the rank of the tensor by 1. Since the rank of $\mathbf{D}_1$ is 2 then the rank of $\nabla\cdot\mathbf{D}_1$ is 1. $\endgroup$ – Alessandro Zunino Dec 14 '18 at 18:21
  • $\begingroup$ Ok then. But the notation is misleading. $\endgroup$ – Cham Dec 14 '18 at 18:21
0
$\begingroup$

You can combine the two conservation equations to obtain

$$ \rho_0\frac{\partial v}{\partial t}+c^2\frac{\partial \rho_1}{\partial r}-\nu\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\frac{\partial \rho_1}{\partial r}\bigg|_{r=r_0} = 0$$

using the Fourier transform method is possible to solve this differential equation for the variable $\frac{\partial \rho_1}{\partial r}\bigg|_{r=r_0}$ obtaining then equation $(1)$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @Cham here you are right, the velocity should be scalar, because we are considering only the radial coordinate. I corrected it. $\endgroup$ – Alessandro Zunino Dec 14 '18 at 18:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.