1
$\begingroup$

I want to solve the following problem using both direct surface integration and divergence theorem, but the results somehow do not match. I could not troubleshoot where do I do wrong. Please help me troubleshoot this.

Calculate the flux of the flux $\vec{J}$ going through the surface of the cylinder (including both circle cap at z = 0 and z = L) for $0 < r < R$, $0 < z < L$, and $0 < \theta < 2\pi$. $\vec{J}$ is already in cylindrical coordinates.

$$\vec{J}(r,\theta,z) = [(1-r^2)z,\, r-z,\,ln(z+1)]$$

Using divergence theorem, I get the below results. I am able to check this one using Mathematica so I am thinking this should be the right results for both methods: $$\iiint_Vdiv\vec{J}dV = \pi R[L^2(1-R^2)+Rln(L+1)]$$

Using surface integrals: $$\iint_S\vec{J}.d\vec{S} = \iint_{circle\,cap\,at\,z=0}T + \iint_{circle\,cap\,at\,z=L}T + \iint_{cylinder}T$$ where $$T=\vec{J}(\vec{r}(u,v)).||\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial u} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial v}||\,dudv$$

For circle cap at z = 0, $\vec{r}(r,\theta)=[r cos\theta, \,rsin\theta,\,0]$. Doing integration I get 0.

For circle cap at z = L, $\vec{r}(r,\theta)=[r cos\theta, \,rsin\theta,\,0]$. Doing integration I get $\pi R^2 ln(L+1)$. This is the second term in divergence theorem result.

For cylinder, $\vec{r}(\theta,z)=[R cos\theta, \,R sin\theta,\,z]$. Doing integration I get zero. I believe this is where I do wrong so I will put some details here: $$\vec{N}=||\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial \theta} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial z}|| = [Rcos\theta,\,Rsin\theta,\,0]$$ $$\vec{J}.\vec{N}=(R-R^3)z\,cos\theta + (R^2-Rz)\,sin\theta$$ Plut in expression for $\vec{J}.\vec{N}$ for the below integration to calculate surface flux, I will get zero because integral of sin/cos equal to -cos/sin, from 0 to $2\pi$, will produce zero term in the product. $$\int_0^L \int_0^{2\pi} \vec{J}.\vec{N}\,d\theta dz=0$$

Thus, the overall sum of surface integrals will only be $\pi R^2 ln(L+1)$, which doesn't match the divergence theorem method result.

Thank you for your help!

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

First of all, it is a good approach to try to find the solution with different methods.

Your surface integrals look correct. I suspect a problem with the divergence theorem. $\vec{J}$ should be a continuously differentiable vector field, and I don't believe it is. $\nabla \cdot \vec{J}=\frac{z}{r}-3rz+\frac{1}{z+1}$, which is not well defined on $\mathbb{R}^3$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I have never realized to check the conditions to use the divergence theorem. Wasting so much time checking the algebra. $\endgroup$ Nov 4 '16 at 22:00
  • $\begingroup$ This is why trying to find the final result with different methods can be so educational! $\endgroup$
    – Kuifje
    Nov 4 '16 at 22:35

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.