Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.

org on October 7, 2010

Construction of threedimensional stationary Euler flows from pseudo advected vorticity equations
Takahiro Nishiyama Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 2003 459, 2393-2398 doi: 10.1098/rspa.2003.1132

Email alerting service

Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article sign up in the box at the top right-hand corner of the article or click here

To subscribe to Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A go to: http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/subscriptions

This journal is 2003 The Royal Society

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

10.1098/ rspa.2003.1132

Construction of three-dimensional stationary Euler ows from pseudo-advected vorticity equations

By Taka hiro N is h iy am a Department of Mechanical Engineering, Fukuoka Institute of Technology, Fukuoka 811-0295, Japan (nisiyama@t.ac.jp)
Received 8 July 2002; accepted 3 February 2003; published online 14 July 2003

Some vorticity equations with pseudo-advection terms are proposed. They yield three-dimensional stationary Euler ows at t = 1. In particular, one of them generates the Beltrami ow.
Keywords: stationary Euler ows; vorticity equation; Beltrami ow

1. Introduction
The three-dimensional stationary Euler equations u ru = rp; ru=0 (1.1)

give the velocity u(x) and the pressure p(x) of a steady-state inviscid incompressible uid with unit density at x 2 ( R3 ). To obtain solutions to (1.1) with non-vanishing vorticity, Vallis et al. (1989) proposed the following two non-stationary systems for v(x; t) and q(x; t): vt + v rv + ! vt = rq; vt + v rv + ! r r (v !) = rq; r v = 0; r v = 0: (1.2) (1.3)

Here is a non-zero constant and ! = r v. In the two-dimensional case, that is, for v = (v1 (x; y; t); v2 (x; y; t); 0) and ! = (0; 0; !(x; y; t)) at (x; y) 2 ~ R2 , both (1.2) and (1.3) yield Z d j!j2 d2 x = 0 dt ~ when v nj@ ~ = 0 (and !j@ ~ = 0 for (1.3)). Here @ ~ is the boundary of ~ and n is the unit outward normal vector. Furthermore, they lead to Z Z 1 d jvj2 d2 x = v ( ! vt ) d2 x 2 dt ~ ~ Z Z 2 jvt j2 d2 x; = (v rv) vt d x = ~ ~ Z Z 1 d jvj2 d2 x = jr (v !)j2 d2 x; (1.4) 2 dt ~ ~
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003) 459, 2393{2398

2393

2003 The Royal Society c

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

2394

T. Nishiyama

respectively. These imply that vt jt= 1 = 0 and r (v !)jt= 1 = 0 not only when > 0 but also when < 0, if ~ is bounded. Therefore, they concluded that u = vjt= 1 is a two-dimensional solution to (1.1) with p = qjt= 1 . Moatt (1990) pointed out that their conclusion is also valid in the axisymmetric case. From a rigorous point of view, the existence of a solution to (1.2) or (1.3) is dicult to prove globally in time even in the two-dimensional or the axisymmetric case because the nonlinearity of the terms is too strong. Nevertheless, the idea of Vallis et al . (1989) can be justied in some rigorous way (Nishiyama 2001a; b). Here, and from now on, the word `rigorous means `rigorous in the sense of analysis with function spaces, such as the Sobolev spaces. Nishiyama (2003a) rigorously discussed ~ vt + ! P (v !) = rq; rv = 0

~ ~ with vnj@ ~ = 0, where P is an operator such that P f = f + rQ with Q satisfying Q = r f and (f + rQ) nj@ ~ = 0. This system has the same property as (1.2) and (1.3). As Moatt (1990) mentioned, the R method of Vallis et al. (1989) is not applicable in the three-dimensional case because j!j2 d3 x is not conserved. On the other hand, the procedure of Moatt (1985) is eective. He suggested using the relaxation of a viscous and perfectly conductive magneto-uid with the velocity v(x; t), magnetic eld B(x; t), pressure q(x; t), unit density, and viscosity > 0 in a bounded , where vj@ = 0 and B nj@ = 0. They are governed by 9 vt + v rv = rq + B rB rjBj2 =2 + v;> = Bt = r (v B); (1.5) > ; r v = r B = 0; for which we have 1 d 2 dt

(jvj2 + jBj2 ) d3 x = Z d A B d3 x = 0: dt

j!j2 d3 x;

(1.6)

Here A is a vector potential for B. He concluded that the system (1.5) tends to an equilibrium B rB = r(q + jBj2 =2); as t ! 1, that is, u = Bjt=
1

r B = 0;

v = Bt = 0;

is a non-trivial solution to (1.1) with p = (q + jBj2 =2)jt=

1

In a rigorous sense, his theory contains two diculties. One is to prove the temporally global existence of a solution to (1.5). The other is to obtain the decay vt ! 0 (as t ! 1), whereas v ! 0 is easy. In general, the decay of a function does not mean the decay of its derivative. For example, limt! 1 t1 sin t2 = 0, while
t!

lim
1

d 1 (t sin t2 ) 6= 0: dt

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003)

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

Stationary Euler ows

2395

Although Moatt (1990) gave another magnetohydrodynamic system as a substitute for (1.5), it contains the same two diculties. Nevertheless, Nishiyama (2002, 2003b) rigorously justied his idea by modifying (1.5) as 9 vt + v rv + ! vt = rq + B rB rjBj2 =2 + v;> = Bt = r ((v + vt ) B); (1.7) > ; r v = r B = 0; and using some technique to evade discussing the temporally global solvability of (1.7). The constant > 0 enables us to obtain the decay of vt because we have Z Z 1 d (jvj2 + j!j2 + jBj2 ) d3 x = ( jvt j2 + j!j2 ) d3 x: 2 dt

The aim of this paper is to propose new equations to obtain three-dimensional solutions to (1.1) with non-vanishing vorticity. They are given under periodic boundary conditions in x 2. In particular, one of them generates the Beltrami ow. This is discussed in x 3. Non-periodic cases are also discussed there.

2. Pseudo-advected vorticity equations

Let us consider with V satisfying one of V = V (1) = P V =V
(2) ;p er ((r

!t = r (V !) !) !);

(2.1)

= r r ((r !) !);

V = V (3) = (r !) ! and periodic boundary conditions. Here P ;p er is an operator such that P ;p er f = f + rQ with Q satisfying Q = r f and the periodic boundary conditions. Since (2.1) with r V = ! is the usual vorticity equation, we call (2.1) with V = V (1) ; V (2) ; V (3) `pseudo-advected vorticity equations. Taking into account that they are analogous to the second equation in (1.5) or (1.7) as ! $ B, we can also call them `pseudo-advected magnetic eld equations. It should be noted that r V (3) = 0 is not always valid, while r V (1) = r V (2) = 0. Let be a cube with periodic boundary conditions applied, using the same periodicity length in each direction. Then, applying integration by parts to (2.1) and noting that Z Z Z 3 3 f P ;p er f d x = jP ;p er f j2 d3 x; (P ;p er f rQ) P ;p er f d x =

we deduce that

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003)

8 Z > > jP ;p er ((r !) !)j2 d3 x > > > Z > Z < 1 d 2 3 jr ((r !) !)j2 d3 x j!j d x = > 2 dt > Z > > > > : j(r !) !j2 d3 x

when V = V (1) ; when V = V (2) ; when V = V (3) : (2.2)

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

2396

T. Nishiyama

R Therefore, j!j2 d3 x is monotonically decreasing in t. Note that the second equality of (2.2) is similar to (1.4). R Furthermore, using a function v which satises r v = !, r v = 0, vd3 x = 0 and the periodic boundary conditions, we have the conservation of helicity: Z d v ! d3 x = 0: (2.3) dt

The helicity is a quantity measuring the degree of knottedness of !-lines, that is, the ux lines of !. By the analogy ! $ B, it corresponds to the magnetic helicity R A B d3 x in (1.6). See Berger & Field (1984) and Moatt (1969), in which they investigated the relation between the uid or magnetic helicity and the topological structure of !- or B-lines. Representing v and ! in the form of the Fourier series, we can prove Z Z Z jvj2 d3 x 6 C j!j2 d3 x; (j!j2 + (r v)2 ) d3 x = C (2.4)

where C is a positive constant depending only on the lengths of edges of . Therefore, (2.3) leads to Z Z 3 3 v0 !0 d x = v ! d x

R where v0 = vjt= 0 and !0 = !jt= 0 . If we give v0 and !0 so that v0 !0 d3 x 6= 0, R then j!j2 d3 x does not go to zero as t ! 1. (According to Freedman (1988), even R R if v0 !0 d3 x = 0, there exists a case in which j!j2 d3 x is bounded from below by a positive constant.) Since (2.2) yields Z 8Z 1 > > jP ;p er ((r !) !)j2 d3 x when V = V (1) ; dt > > 0 >Z > 1 Z Z < 1 j!0 j2 d3 x > jr ((r !) !)j2 d3 x when V = V (2) ; dt > 0 2 >Z Z > 1 > > > : j(r !) !j2 d3 x dt when V = V (3) ;
0

jvj d x

j!j d x

1=2

6C

1=2

j!j2 d3 x;

we obtain

;p er ((r

r ((r !) !) = 0; (r !) ! = 0; ! r! = rp

9 !) !) = 0;> = > ;

(2.5)

respectively, at t = 1. Clearly, each of them is rewritten in the form

with some p(x). These R facts imply that u = !jt= 1 is a solution to (1.1) with p(x) and is nontrivial if v0 !0 d3 x 6= 0. We remark that the pseudo-advected vorticity changes
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003)

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

Stationary Euler ows

2397

into the stationary velocity. By the analogy ! $ B, we can also regard !jt= 1 as a magnetostatic equilibrium. Furthermore, using a term of Moatt (1985), we can say that it is `topologically accessible from the initial state !0 because of (2.3). The concept of topological accessibility was introduced by him to represent a kind of preservation of ux-line congurations. Note that r u = r !jt= 1 is nonvanishing if !jt= 1 is. Indeed, in the same way as (2.4), we can prove that Z Z j!j2 d3 x 6 C jr !j2 d3 x:

3. Discussion
In x 2, we proposed using the relaxation of the pseudo-advected vorticity equations (2.1) with V = V (1) ; V (2); V (3) to obtain three-dimensional solutions to (1.1) with non-vanishing vorticity under periodic boundary conditions. These equations are based on the ideas of Moatt (1985) and Vallis et al . (1989) in the sense that the second equality of (2.2) is similar to (1.4), and (2.3) has the same form as (1.6). It is an open problem how dierent the solutions constructed with V (1); V (2) and V (3) are, from the same initial data. From a rigorous point of view, our theory is justied by using spaces of the Radon measures in the same way as in Nishiyama (2002). For this, a set of eigenfunctions for the operator r with periodic boundary conditions, which was used by Constantin & Majda (1988), is useful. The spaces of the Radon measures contain elements which are singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure, such as Diracs -measure. This implies that some of the steady ows generated by (2.1) may have singularities. When is not a cube but an arbitrarily bounded domain in R3 , we obtain an analogous result for (2.1) with V = V (4) = P ((r !) !) by imposing ! nj@ = 0 instead of periodic boundary conditions. Here P is the ~ three-dimensional version of the operator P introduced in x 1. Moreover, if !j@ = 0 (2) and V (3) seem to work well because integrals on @ is imposed, then V vanish in applying integration by parts. However, the author does not know whether or not our theory with !j@ = 0 is justied in a rigorous manner. Lastly, let us remark on the third equality of (2.5). It means that (2.1) with V = V (3) yields a solution u = !jt= 1 to (r u) u = 0; or u ru = rjuj2 =2: (3.1)

This solution is called the Beltrami ow or a force-free eld. It is represented in the form r u = (x)u (3.2) with a scalar function (x) which satises ur = 0 and may depend on u. Recently, (3.2) was rigorously or numerically investigated by Boulmezaoud & Amari (2000, 2001) and Kaiser et al . (2000). As a special case of (3.2), the ow u satisfying r u = const:u has been studied by many authors in the context of uid mechanics, magnetohydrodynamics, astrophysics, etc. (see Boulmezaoud et al . 1999; Constantin & Majda 1988; Moatt & Tsinober 1992, and references therein). In particular,
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003)

Downloaded from rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org on October 7, 2010

2398

T. Nishiyama

Dombre et al . (1986) showed that the Arnold{Beltrami{Childress (ABC) ow, that is, u = r u = (A sin z + C cos y; B sin x + A cos z; C sin y + B cos x) with some constants A, B, C, has chaotic streamlines. We conjecture that solutions to (3.1) generated by (2.1) with V = V (3) have complex streamlines like the ABC ow if we give initial data !0 with complex ux lines.
This work was partly supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientic Research from the Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.

References
Berger, M. A. & Field, G. B. 1984 The topological properties of magnetic helicity. J. Fluid Mech. 147, 133{148. Boulmezaoud, T. Z. & Amari, T. 2000 On the existence of nonlinear force-free elds in threedimensional domains. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 51, 942{967. Boulmezaoud, T. Z. & Amari, T. 2001 A nite-element method for computing nonlinear forcefree elds. Math. Comput. Modelling 34, 903{920. Boulmezaoud, T. Z., Maday, Y. & Amari, T. 1999 On the linear force-free elds in bounded and unbounded three-dimensional domains. Math. Modelling Numer. Analysis 33, 359{393. Constantin, P. & Majda, A. 1988 The Beltrami spectrum for incompressible uid ows. Commun. Math. Phys. 115, 435{456. Dombre, T., Frisch, U., Greene, J. M., H enon, M., Mehr, A. & Soward, A. M. 1986 Chaotic streamlines in the ABC ows. J. Fluid Mech. 167, 353{391. Freedman, M. H. 1988 A note on topology and magnetic energy in incompressible perfectly conducting uids. J. Fluid Mech. 194, 549{551. Kaiser, R., Neudert, M. & von Wahl, W. 2000 On the existence of force-free magnetic elds with small nonconstant in exterior domains. Commun. Math. Phys. 211, 111{136. Mo att, H. K. 1969 The degree of knottedness of tangled vortex lines. J. Fluid Mech. 35, 117{129. Mo att, H. K. 1985 Magnetostatic equilibria and analogous Euler ows of arbitrarily complex topology. 1. Fundamentals. J. Fluid Mech. 159, 359{378. Mo att, H. K. 1990 Structure and stability of solutions of the Euler equations: a Lagrangian approach. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 333, 321{342. Mo att, H. K. & Tsinober, A. 1992 Helicity in laminar and turbulent ow. A. Rev. Fluid Mech. 24, 281{312. Nishiyama, T. 2001a Pseudo-advection method for the two-dimensional stationary Euler equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 129, 429{432. Nishiyama, T. 2001b Pseudo-advection method for the axisymmetric stationary Euler equations. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 81, 711{715. Nishiyama, T. 2002 Magnetohydrodynamic approach to solvability of the three-dimensional stationary Euler equations. Glasgow Math. J. 44, 411{418. Nishiyama, T. 2003a Construction of solutions to the two-dimensional stationary Euler equations by the pseudo-advection method. Arch. Math. (In the press.) Nishiyama, T. 2003b Magnetohydrodynamic approach to measure-valued solution of the twodimensional stationary Euler equations. (Submitted.) Vallis, G. K., Carnevale, G. F. & Young, W. R. 1989 Extremal energy properties and construction of stable solutions of the Euler equations. J. Fluid Mech. 207, 133{152.

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003)