|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
New Member
William
Join Date: Sep 2022
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4 ![]() |
I am wondering that when we derived the momentum equation using the differential form of the transport equation,
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,815
Rep Power: 68 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well yes the tell is that it must be a tensor and not a vector or scalar, which immediately eliminates the possibility of a cross or inner product. Even compilers will know not to compile a sequence that has mismatched operands and throw an error if the classes are incorrect, there's no reason an intelligent human being cannot do better.
Obviously it is better if everything comes with a dictionary and a manual of how to do it. But outer and inner products already have their notations. It would be a little silly not to use them. For example in a polynomial equation ab = c, how do you know ab is the product of a and b and not addition of a and b, a+ b? Is it because you seek a higher authority to decide things for you? Or is it because addition already has a notation a+b and if you wanted it to signify addition, you would write a + b and not ab? Dyadic notation is extension of vector notation into dyadics and specifically here you are use nabla vector notation where those have clear conventions for the dot and cross products (i.e. ![]() ![]() ![]() Last edited by LuckyTran; September 9, 2022 at 00:55. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
New Member
William
Join Date: Sep 2022
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4 ![]() |
Apart from your unprofessionalism I think you missed the point of my question, and perhaps I did not make it very clear so my apology.
I guess a better way to phrase my question is this: the dummy property ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
New Member
William
Join Date: Sep 2022
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4 ![]() |
I think after a bit of thought I can answer this question myself now. Basically if
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,815
Rep Power: 68 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Now do it for the triple products and quadruple products and higher order products. If the uu is not a dyadic product then you'll a growing number of notations in order to determine if it is the inner product, double inner product, triple inner product, double outer product, triple outer product, and so on. The point of notational conventions, is actually following them. That's why they're conventions.
Also note that the dyadic product is a subclass of tensor products and it is wrong in general to call it a tensor product. It works for navier-stokes because the velocity vector is rank 1 and uu actually is a dyadic product. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,982
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
|
What Lucky was probably trying to convey is that you are using your source material wrong or it is wrong the material itself.
If you were using the Einstein notation, you would have 0 doubt about everything. So, in Lucky terms, it is your impression (or a problem in the material you are reading) that the operation is subject to interpretation, but it actually isn't. To be more precise, where would a cross or dot product come from? They are simply not there. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,982
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The meaning of phi is always related to the transport theorem. Any quantity phi is advected by normal component of the mass flux rho u. Consequently no scalar product can appear since
Int[S] rho un phi dS is the meaningful physical contribution. For the mass phi=1, for the momentum phi=u. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
momentum equation, navier stokes equation, tensor product |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
add a pressure drop term in the momentum equation | a.lone | FLUENT | 0 | July 3, 2019 06:48 |
Domain Reference Pressure and mass flow inlet boundary | AdidaKK | CFX | 75 | August 20, 2018 05:37 |
mass flow in is not equal to mass flow out | saii | CFX | 12 | March 19, 2018 05:21 |
Coefficients discretized momentum equation | michujo | Main CFD Forum | 4 | June 20, 2012 01:33 |
Discretization of momentum equation query | siw | CFX | 0 | June 20, 2011 08:38 |