1
$\begingroup$

I am a beginner in physics, and I was studying fluid mechanics, specifically Newton's second law, when I was surprised to find that the expression for acceleration was composed of both local and temporal acceleration. This puzzled me because, in solid-body mechanics, we did not use this approach and only considered temporal acceleration.

I would like to ask you about the reason we use both local acceleration, which arises due to spatial changes in velocity, and temporal acceleration, which arises due to temporal changes in velocity, when calculating acceleration in fluid mechanics? This is mathematically expressed as:

$$a = \frac{Dv}{Dt} = \frac{∂v}{∂t} + (v ⋅ ∇) v$$

where temporal acceleration is represented by $\frac{∂v}{∂t}$ and local acceleration is represented by $(v ⋅ ∇) v$.

In contrast, why do we only consider temporal acceleration in solid-body mechanics, neglecting any spatial changes in velocity? In solid-body mechanics, acceleration is expressed as:

$$a = \frac{Dv}{Dt} = \frac{∂v}{∂t}$$

where only the change in velocity with respect to time is considered, without accounting for spatial variations.

New contributor
Bezina Taki is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
$\endgroup$
1

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

I've never heard the phrase local acceleration used in this context before, and I think it hurts more than it helps.

They key thing to recognize is that the $v$ you are differentiating is not the velocity of a particle in any direct sense. Rather, it is a function of space and time, such that $v(x,t)$ is the average velocity of the fluid at the point $x$ and time $t$.

Now, imagine a tiny graduate student in a tiny raft which is being carried along by the flowing fluid. If their position at time $t$ is given by $x_r(t)$ ($r$ is for "raft"), then because their velocity is determined by the fluid, their velocity at time $t$ is given by

$$v\big(x_r(t), t\big)$$ and their acceleration by $$\frac{d}{dt} v\big(x_r(t), t\big) = \frac{\partial v}{\partial t}\big(x_r(t),t\big) + x'_r(t) \cdot \nabla v\big(x_r(t),t\big) \rightarrow \frac{\partial v}{\partial t} + (v\cdot \nabla) v$$

Typically we talk about a tiny parcel of fluid flowing along rather than a graduate student, but the same idea applies. The acceleration of a parcel can be broken down into two parts - first, the fluid velocity could be changing at the parcel's location, and second, the fluid velocity might be different in different locations.


By way of example, one might imagine two limiting cases. In the first, we might have a fluid flowing uniformly through a pipe, with the flow velocity increasing with time. The velocity is the same everywhere in space (so $(v\cdot \nabla)v = 0$), but each second the flow rate is going up. This would correspond to the $\partial v/\partial t$ contribution.

Secondly, you might imagine a pipe which is steadily becoming narrower, causing the fluid velocity to increase the further you go down the pipe (since the flow rate must be constant). At any given point, the fluid velocity is constant in time (so $\partial v/\partial t=0$) but the fluid velocity changes with position, corresponding to the $(v\cdot \nabla)v$ contribution.

In a generic flow, both of these things are happening, so the acceleration of a fluid parcel co-moving with the fluid velocity is the sum of the two contributions.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ While accurate, OP seems to be more interested in the lack of the $\mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla$ term in solid body dynamics than the definition/use of the material derivative in fluids. $\endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @J.Murray Thank you, sir, for the detailed and beautiful answer, which I think provides half of the answer to my question. The other half, as Mr. Kyle mentioned in the comment, can be phrased differently: Why is velocity in solid body mechanics related only to time and not to spatial coordinates, whereas in fluid mechanics, it is related to both time and spatial coordinates $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ In solid-mechanics we normally consider rigid bodies, in which every particle has zero relative velocity to all other particles in the solid (which is how solids maintain shape), so you don't normally have spatially varying velocities. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @BezinaTaki Can you point me toward a resource which treats solid mechanics and doesn't utilize the spatial coordinates? If the body is assumed to be rigid, than the "velocity field" (by which I mean, rate of change of local displacements) is spatially uniform. But in general (e.g. elastodynamics) this isn't true, and you need the spatial term also. $\endgroup$
    – J. Murray
    Commented 2 days ago

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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