Past exam of the theoretical mechanics course of the University of Oxford / 2011 / B / 4

Let $R(t)$ rotate vectors from the rotating frame to the inertial frame. For any rotating-frame vector $\mathbf{a}$, differentiating $R\mathbf{a}$ adds $R(\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{a})$ to $R\dot{\mathbf{a}}$. Thus an inertial particle velocity is $R(\mathbf{u}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x})$, and, for constant angular velocity, its acceleration isInsert this into the inertial Euler equations and express forces in the rotating coordinates. This givesThe additional terms are the Coriolis acceleration and the centripetal term associated with frame rotation. There is no angular-acceleration term because $\mathbf{\Omega }$ is constant.

Write the conservative body force as $\mathbf{g}=-\nabla {\Phi }_g$. The supplied vector identity gives $\mathbf{\Omega }\times (\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x})=-\frac{1}{2}\nabla |\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}{|}^2$. For constant density, defineMoving the centrifugal and conservative terms to the right then gives ${\partial }_t\mathbf{u}+(\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{u}+2\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{u}=-{\rho }^{-1}\nabla P$. Only the gradient of this reduced pressure matters, so an additive spatial constant is immaterial.

Linearize about rest, with the equilibrium forces already absorbed in the reduced pressure. The quadratic convective acceleration drops out. Since $\mathbf{k}\times (u\mathbf{i}+v\mathbf{j}+w\mathbf{k})=-v\mathbf{i}+u\mathbf{j}$, the component equations areThe scan prints $v_w$ in the continuity equation; the derivative required by incompressibility is $v_y$.

To eliminate pressure, put $\zeta =v_x-u_y$ and ${\nabla }_h^2={\partial }_x^2+{\partial }_y^2$. Taking the vertical component of the curl of momentum givesTaking horizontal divergence of momentum and substituting continuity givesDifferentiate this in $z$ and use $P_z/\rho =-w_t$:One more time derivative, followed by the vorticity relation, yields the Poincaré equation for inertial wavesThis derivation retains all three velocity components, including the transverse component coupled by rotation.

Write $\omega$ for the nonzero forcing frequency, to distinguish it from the vertical velocity $w$. Put $k_z=\pi /h$ and $Z(z)=\cos (\pi (2z+h)/(2h))=-\sin (k_{z}z)$. Then $Z(0)=Z(h)=0$ and $Z^{\prime \prime }=-k_z^{2}Z$, so it meets the rigid-wall conditions. Substituting $w=\mathrm{Re}(f(x)e^{-i\omega t}Z(z))$ into the scalar wave equation givesorThe radiation sign for an inertial wave must exclude any disturbance arriving from $x=+\infty$. This means an radiation condition for propagating waves, or bounded decay for an evanescent wave.

For $0<|\omega |<2|\Omega |$, put $q=k_z\sqrt{4{\Omega }^2/{\omega }^2-1}$. The solutions are oscillatory. The inertial-wave dispersion relation is ${\omega }^2=4{\Omega }^2{k}_z^2/(k_x^2+k_z^2)$; its horizontal group velocity is $c_{g,x}=-\omega k_x/(k_x^2+k_z^2)$. Positive energy transport into the channel therefore requires $k_x=-\mathrm{sgn}(\omega )q$. The solution isFor a positive frequency, the phase travels towards negative $x$ while the group velocity travels towards positive $x$. Choosing the outgoing sign from the phase velocity alone would give the wrong result.

For $|\omega |>2|\Omega |$, set $\kappa =k_z\sqrt{1-4{\Omega }^2/{\omega }^2}$. Excluding the exponentially growing solution givesThis disturbance decays away from the wavemaker and does not propagate horizontally. At the cutoff the ODE degenerates to $f^{\prime \prime }=0$; zero frequency is not a nonzero forced harmonic mode with this vertical shape.

There is a second printed inconsistency: the stated velocity $u\mathbf{i}+w\mathbf{k}$, if taken literally with no $y$ dependence and no transverse velocity, cannot support a nontrivial rotating inertial wave. Its transverse momentum equation would give $2\Omega u=0$, then continuity and the rigid walls would force $w=0$. The scalar solutions above are the intended inertial-wave solutions when two-dimensional means dependence on $x,z$ while retaining the transverse component $v$. For a mode, $-i\omega v+2\Omega u=0$ explicitly supplies the generally nonzero transverse velocity. Thus the scalar equation can be solved as requested, but the full vector field needs this correction to the printed two-component description.