Why are the eigenvalues of this problem different in polar and Cartesian coordinates?

82 Views Asked by At

I'll admit I'm not really an expert on coordinate transformations, so my error/misunderstanding may be a simple fix; in fact, that would be ideal.

I'm trying to determine the eigenvalues of the Lamb-Oseen vortex velocity gradient field. The Lamb-Oseen velocity field in polar coordinates is given as $$ \vec{u}(r,t) = \begin{bmatrix} u_r \\ u_\theta \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ \frac{\Gamma}{2\pi r} (1 - e^{-r^2/(4 \nu t)}) \end{bmatrix} $$ When I compute the gradient in polar coordinates, I get the following form: $$ \nabla \vec{u} = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} & \frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial r} \\ \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial \theta} & \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial \theta} \end{bmatrix} $$ (Maybe it should be transposed, but that doesn't end up mattering here.) Clearly, $\frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial r}$ is the only non-zero term, so the eigenvalues will both be zero as well.

The physical problem with this is that the eigenvalues should have at least some non-zero imaginary part because the swirl criterion for vortex identification should identify pretty much the entire field as a vortex, and it is defined as the magnitude of the imaginary part of the velocity gradient eigenvalues. Indeed, when I compute the eigenvalues in Cartesian coordinates using the following form, I do get non-zero imaginary eigenvalues. $$ \vec{u}(x,y,t) = \begin{bmatrix} u \\ v \end{bmatrix} = \frac{\Gamma}{2\pi (x^2 + y^2)} \bigg(1 - e^{-(x^2 + y^2)/(4 \nu t)}\bigg)\begin{bmatrix} -y \\ x\end{bmatrix} $$ Edit: I originally (mistakenly) put $\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}}$, but that was simply an error writing it. I'm assuming one of two problems:

  1. I'm just not doing the transformation/polar gradient correctly, so the terms should look different.
  2. The eigenvalues are unique to the coordinate system. I could see how the values themselves might change between coordinate systems, but all zeros to imaginary non-zero numbers seems wrong.

I would appreciate any explanation of what I might be misunderstanding or someone pointing out a mistake I made in my process.

Thanks!

2

There are 2 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

Thanks to @A rural reader for pointing out the issue. For completeness, I'll spell out the answer here:

The velocity gradient has a couple more terms I've neglected by accident, and it should look like this:

$$ \nabla \vec{u} = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} & \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial \theta} - \frac{u_\theta}{r} \\ \frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial r} & \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial \theta} + \frac{u_r}{r} \end{bmatrix} $$

Now with $u_\theta$ and $\frac{\partial u_\theta}{\partial r}$ on the off-diagonal elements the eigenvalues are non-zero.

1
On
  • Coordinate transformations are always just based on the chain rule.

  • When we transform vector fields we cannot transform their components as if they were scalars. That was the (forgivable) sin you committed :). It happened to me as well.

In polar coordinates your vector field is of the form $$ \textstyle\boldsymbol{u}=u_r\,\partial_r+u_\theta\,\frac{1}{r}\partial_\theta $$ where \begin{align} u_r&=0\,,&u_\theta=\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi r} (1 - e^{-r^2/(4 \nu t)}) \,. \end{align}

According to first principles (chain rule), \begin{align} u_x&=u_r\cos\theta-u_\theta\sin\theta=\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi\sqrt{x^2+y^2}} (1 - e^{-(x^2+y^2)/(4 \nu t)})\,\color{red}{\frac{-y}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}}\,,\\ u_y&=u_r\sin\theta+u_\theta\cos\theta=\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi\sqrt{x^2+y^2}} (1 - e^{-(x^2+y^2)/(4 \nu t)})\,\color{red}{\frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}}\,. \end{align} These expressions can be simplified by which your $\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$ becomes $x^2+y^2\,.$ Now I am curious to see that Jacobian $\nabla\boldsymbol{u}$ again.