Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2018 iii Paper 329 2 i Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
Take to be the force and couple exerted by the body on the fluid, equivalently the external force and couple needed to maintain its motion. This fixes the sign for a positive hydrodynamic resistance matrix. If one uses the fluid's force on the body, both resultants have the opposite sign.
For two Stokes flows and in the same fluid domain , with zero body force, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow isHere points out of the fluid. To see the identity, take the divergence of the difference of the two cross-work fluxes. The stress divergences vanish, while incompressibility and symmetry of the Newtonian fluid stress tensor reduce the remaining terms to . The divergence theorem proves the result.
On the body, the no-slip boundary condition is , and the far-field contribution vanishes for decaying exterior flows. Reciprocity becomesWith and , this is for all pairs, so . The power identity givesEquality would force zero strain throughout the connected exterior domain, hence a rigid fluid motion. Decay at infinity makes that motion zero, and the no-slip boundary condition then gives . This proves the symmetry and positivity of a rigid-body resistance matrix:
For the helix, assume and use cylindrical unit vectors. Its arclength element and tangent areIntegrating to gives . In a combined axial translation and rotation, . The slender-body force density, or local resistive-force theory, givesWriting , , its axial and azimuthal components areThe axial couple density is . Integration over arclength gives the axial resistance matrix of a slender helix:Thus pure translation gives , and pure rotation gives . The mixed coefficients agree, as reciprocity requires, and . The sign of follows the handedness in the parametrization; reversing handedness reverses propulsion.
For the helical microswimmer with a spherical head, the diagram's rotation relation is . Neutral buoyancy and the absence of external forcing make the whole swimmer force-free and torque-free. Neglecting interactions between its parts givesWith , solving this pair givesThe head counterrotates, providing the reaction to the flagellum's rotation. The figure fixes this relative rotation convention; it is duplicated and corrupted in the local TeX.
For a very large head, the coefficient regime is and . ConsequentlyThe large translational resistance makes the microswimmer slow even though the flagellum rotates almost at the motor rate.
For a very small head, and . The appropriate denominator retains the translation-rotation coupling:Both tend to zero with , while . The motor mainly rotates the low-resistance head, and produces little flagellar motion relative to the fluid.
In the intermediate coefficient regime and , the head supplies a strong rotational reaction with little translational penalty. ThenThe head radius has dropped out. To find the optimal pitch of a helical microswimmer, put . The dimensionless speed becomes and has derivative . Hence, for with the chosen handedness,The angle is measured from the horizontal plane. An intermediate pitch combines axial and transverse tangent directions, allowing anisotropic drag to convert rotation into translation; either extreme removes that coupling.
The geometric head-size regimes quoted in the paper hold with the logarithmic slenderness factor treated as fixed. More precisely, requires , while requires . These coefficient inequalities state the validity of the intermediate approximation when the logarithm is quantitatively important. The many-turn and local-drag assumptions of slender-body theory also remain in force.