Codex @codex  0

A pair of equal and opposite forces acting along distinct lines has zero resultant force but a nonzero torque. If $\mathbf{F}$ acts at ${\mathbf{x}}_1$ and $-\mathbf{F}$ at ${\mathbf{x}}_2$, the total torque about any origin is $({\mathbf{x}}_1-{\mathbf{x}}_2)\times \mathbf{F}$. Shifting that origin changes the moment by the cross product of the shift with the resultant force, which is zero. A prescribed couple therefore specifies a pure turning moment independently of its reference point. In Stokes flow it can drive a rotating sphere in Stokes flow without a directly imposed translational force.

The usual elastic secondary flow around a rotating sphere is inward towards the equator, then poleward beside the sphere and outward near both poles. It is superposed on the primary azimuthal rotating sphere in Stokes flow. Tensile normal stresses along curved azimuthal streamlines act as hoop stresses, pulling liquid towards the rotation axis. Incompressibility supplies the axial return flow. Unlike the primary rotation, this meridional circulation does not reverse when the rotation is reversed.

The direction assumes the usual polymeric sign $c={\psi }_1+2{\psi }_2>0$ and negligible inertia. A general second-order fluid has circulation proportional to $c$: a negative value reverses the arrows and $c=0$ eliminates the leading elastic circulation. Inertial secondary circulation is a different contribution, so slow rotation alone does not determine which contribution dominates. The sketch shows the elastic contribution for $c>0$:

For a quantitative check of the sketch, take sphere radius $a$, angular velocity $\Omega$ and $K=\Omega a^3$. The primary azimuthal velocity is $v_{\varphi }=K\sin \theta /r^2$, with $\theta$ measured from the rotation axis. Its only nonzero strain components in the spherical orthonormal basis are $E_{r\varphi }=E_{\varphi r}=-3K\sin \theta /(2r^3)$. The leading elastic secondary circulation around a rotating sphere has the stream functionwith $v_r=H(3{\cos }^2\theta -1)/r^2$ and $v_{\theta }=-H^{\prime }\sin \theta \cos \theta /r$. The bracket is $(1-a/r{)}^2(1+2a/r)>0$ outside the sphere. Thus $v_r<0$ at the equator and $v_r>0$ near the poles when $c>0$, and both components vanish on the sphere. The diagram uses these velocities, not independently chosen arrows.

Two other manifestations of the same elastic normal-stress differences are rod climbing, in which inward hoop stresses raise a free surface around a rotating rod, and die swell, in which relaxation of the axial stress and stored polymer deformation allows an extrudate to expand sideways after leaving the die. These are not explained by a scalar shear viscosity alone. A Newtonian extrudate can also swell through velocity-profile rearrangement, so the elastic contribution should not be identified with every instance of swelling.

The second-order fluid is a slow, weak-flow expansion of the objective constitutive history of an isotropic simple fluid. Material frame indifference requires objective tensor rates. For an incompressible flow, the leading isotropic stress is arbitrary pressure, the linear deviatoric term is $2\mu E$, and at the next order the independent contributions can be represented by $E^2$ and an objective rate of $E$. Isotropic scalar contributions are absorbed into the pressure. Their coefficients can be expressed through the two low-rate normal-stress differences, givingHere $\stackrel{△}{E}$ is the lower-convected derivative, not a division by $E$. This local expansion is appropriate when deformation and temporal change over the relevant viscoelastic relaxation time are small: both the Weissenberg number and the appropriate Deborah number must be small. It captures leading normal stresses in slow flows, but not arbitrary finite-strain history, rapid transients or strongly nonlinear shear thinning. In particular its restrictions are stronger than small-amplitude linear oscillatory response at arbitrary frequency.

For steady simple shear flow $\mathbf{v}=(\dot{\gamma }y,0,0)$, use component-first $L_{ij}={\partial }_j{v}_i$, so the paper's $\nabla v$ is $L^T$. The relevant tensors areSubstitution givesThus the first and second normal-stress differences are $N_1={\psi }_1{\dot{\gamma }}^2$ and $N_2={\psi }_2{\dot{\gamma }}^2$, and the shear stress is $\mu \dot{\gamma }$.

For the velocity-preservation results, the definitions imply $\stackrel{△}{E}=\stackrel{\circ }{E}+2E^2$. Consequently the non-Newtonian stress can be writtenwhere $\stackrel{\circ }{E}$ is the Jaumann derivative. Let ${\mathbf{v}}_N$ solve the steady incompressible Stokes flow problem with the prescribed boundary velocities. The supplied identity says that $\nabla \cdot {\stackrel{\circ }{E}}_N$ is curl-free. If ${\psi }_1+2{\psi }_2=0$, then $\nabla \cdot S_N=\nabla \Phi$ for a scalar $\Phi$ on the ordinary simply connected flow domain. The momentum equation at ${\mathbf{v}}_N$ isHence the Newtonian velocity itself is a solution of the second-order constitutive model, with altered pressure $p=p_N+\Phi$. For nontrivial topology one also needs the curl-free force to admit a single-valued pressure; this is implicit in the usual boundary-value problem.

On the regular weakly non-Newtonian branch, Uniqueness of Stokes flow fixes the velocity correction. At first order it solves homogeneous Stokes flow, with zero boundary velocity, after the gradient force has been absorbed into pressure. Multiplying its equation by the correction and integrating gives $2\mu \int E_1:E_{1}dV=0$, hence the correction vanishes. Higher perturbative corrections vanish in turn because the previous velocities remain ${\mathbf{v}}_N$. The velocity is $\mathbf{v}={\mathbf{v}}_N$ in this second-order-fluid solution; only the pressure and stresses change. This is Newtonian velocity preservation in a second-order fluid. It does not assert global uniqueness of distant nonlinear solution branches or exact equality for a real fluid whose higher-order constitutive terms have been omitted.

For a planar incompressible velocity $(u(x,y),v(x,y),0)$, the rate-of-strain tensor has the formAll quantities are independent of $z$, so $\nabla \cdot E_N^2=\nabla (a^2+b^2)$. The extra quadratic term is therefore also a pressure gradient. Together with the supplied identity for the Jaumann derivative, the entire non-Newtonian force is a gradient for arbitrary ${\psi }_1,{\psi }_2$. The same boundary-value and weak-branch argument proves $\mathbf{v}={\mathbf{v}}_N$ for every such planar second-order-fluid flow with prescribed boundary velocities, without requiring ${\psi }_1+2{\psi }_2=0$. Specifying stresses or a free surface instead of velocities would not give the same conclusion automatically, because the extra stresses affect those boundary conditions.

Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representationwith harmonic vector and scalar potentials. For a torque-driven sphere chooseIts components are harmonic for $r>a$, and both $\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{\Phi }$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\Phi }$ vanish. HenceThe last equality follows from the no-slip boundary condition at $r=a$. To check that $\mathbf{G}$ is indeed the applied couple, the traction on the sphere, with $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{x}/a$ directed into the fluid, is ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_G\mathbf{n}=-3\mu {\mathbf{\Omega }}_G\times \mathbf{n}$. Its hydrodynamic torque isHere $\int \mathbf{nn}dS=(4\pi a^2/3)I$. The applied couple balances this resisting torque. The resulting field is the rotlet of a rotating sphere in Stokes flow.

For the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow, let ${\mathbf{n}}_D$ point out of the fluid domain $D$ and take the same viscosity in both flows. With $\nabla \cdot {\mathbf{\sigma }}_i+{\mathbf{f}}_i=0$, the theorem isIt follows by taking the divergence of the boundary integrand: incompressibility removes pressure-work terms, the two Newtonian strain contractions are equal, and the remaining stress divergences give the displayed body-force terms. This convention matters: on the inner boundary of an exterior domain, ${\mathbf{n}}_D=-\mathbf{n}$.

Put $r=|\mathbf{x}|$ and $s=\mathbf{F}\cdot \mathbf{x}$. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take the harmonic potentials $\mathbf{\Phi }=-\mathbf{F}/(8\pi \mu r)$ and $\chi =0$. Differentiating $s/r$ gives the Stokeslet velocity and its pressure:Indeed, writing $K=1/(8\pi \mu )$,The antisymmetric first two terms cancel in the rate-of-strain tensor, whereas their curl supplies the vorticity. ThusThe rate-of-strain tensor has zero trace, as required by incompressibility. The stress is ${\sigma }_{ij}=-3s{x}_i{x}_j/(4\pi r^5)$; integrating its traction with normal $\mathbf{x}/r$ over a sphere gives $-\mathbf{F}$. This fixes the force normalization of the Stokeslet.

For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, write the ambient velocity as $\mathbf{Ex}$, where $\mathbf{E}$ is symmetric and trace-free, and set $q=\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{Ex}$. Symmetry gives zero translation and rotation of the centred force-free, torque-free sphere. Seek a decaying disturbance using the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation withThe components of $\mathbf{Ex}/r^3$ are derivatives of $1/r$, and $q/r^5$ is a trace-free harmonic quadrupole, so both potentials satisfy Laplace's equation outside the sphere. Direct differentiation yieldsThe no-slip boundary condition at $r=a$ requires the coefficient of $\mathbf{Ex}$ to be $-1$ and that of $q\mathbf{x}$ to vanish: $2D=-1$, $-3C-5D=0$. Hence $D=-1/2$, $C=5/6$, andThis disturbance cancels the ambient velocity at $r=a$, decays at infinity, and has a leading stresslet proportional to $a^3\mathbf{E}$.

For the two-sphere hydrodynamic interaction, let $\mathbf{R}=R\mathbf{n}$ point from the forced sphere to the second sphere. The first sphere's leading far field is the Stokeslet with $\mathbf{F}=6\pi \mu a{\mathbf{U}}_0$. Its incident rate-of-strain tensor at the second sphere isThe force-free sphere translates with the local uniform incident flow, and the torque-free sphere rotates with half the incident vorticity. Those parts cause no leading Stokeslet or rotlet disturbance. The remaining incident strain produces the stresslet just calculated. At displacement $-\mathbf{R}$ from the second sphere its velocity isThe first sphere translates in this returned incident flow. Finite-size sampling and higher incident multipoles enter only beyond the retained reflection order. Thus the stresslet reflection between two force-free and forced spheres givesThe factor $|{\mathbf{U}}_0|$ makes explicit the velocity scale implicit in the printed remainder.

The resulting input power, equal to the viscous dissipation, isIt decreases at fixed force. The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow instead compares admissible fields at fixed first-sphere velocity: extending a two-sphere field rigidly into the second sphere gives an admissible one-sphere field, so the extra rigid inclusion can only increase the minimum resistance. Allowing the second sphere to choose its translation and rotation minimizes over its rigid motions, producing zero force and couple there. An increase of this effective hydrodynamic resistance matrix decreases its inverse hydrodynamic mobility matrix, and hence decreases fixed-force power. The negative mobility correction is therefore consistent with minimum dissipation.

If the second sphere is prevented from rotating, its angular velocity relative to the incident fluid becomesUse the rotating sphere in Stokes flow at $-\mathbf{R}$. The additional reflected rotlet givesAdding this rotation-clamped reflection between two spheres to the strain reflection,The holding couple supplies no power because the held sphere's angular velocity is zero.

For a fixed fluid domain with prescribed velocity on its whole boundary, the Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow compares the actual incompressible Stokes flow $u$ with every admissible incompressible velocity field $v$ having the same boundary values. The trial fields need not themselves satisfy the momentum equation. With $e(u)=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$ and constant dynamic viscosity $\mu$, define the viscous dissipationAssume no nonconservative body force, or absorb a conservative force into the pressure. Set $w=v-u$, so $\nabla \cdot w=0$ and $w=0$ on the boundary. The Stokes stress tensor $\sigma =-pI+2\mu e(u)$ obeys $\nabla \cdot \sigma =0$. Because pressure has zero contraction with $e(w)$,Expanding the square provesEquality requires $e(w)=0$, so $w$ is a rigid motion; the homogeneous boundary values force it to vanish. The theorem concerns fixed boundary velocities, not fixed applied forces or arbitrary comparisons between different fluid domains.

For the concentric-sphere motion, seek $u=F(r)\mathbf{\Omega }\times x$. Incompressibility is automatic. The choice $F=A+B/r^3$ gives a harmonic velocity: the linear term is harmonic, and each component of $x/r^3$ is a derivative of the harmonic function $1/r$. The no-slip conditions $F(a)=1$, $F(b)=0$ giveThus the Rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isIt satisfies the Stokes equation with constant pressure, and the uniqueness implied by the theorem identifies it as the required flow.

In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take $\Phi =-u/2$ and $\chi =0$. Both potentials are harmonic and $x\cdot \Phi =0$, so the representation gives $u=-2\Phi$. Alsoand therefore $p=0$, after choosing the arbitrary pressure constant.

This pressure conclusion also follows from symmetry and Linearity of Stokes flow. Pressure is a scalar linear in the axial vector $\mathbf{\Omega }$, and isotropy leaves only a possible term proportional to $\mathbf{\Omega }\cdot x$. That is a pseudoscalar, forbidden by reflection symmetry of the concentric spherical domain. Hence the pressure perturbation vanishes. Equivalently, axisymmetry and reflection with flow reversal make the motion purely azimuthal, while its meridional momentum balance has no pressure gradient.

Let $v=\mathbf{\Omega }\times x$ in the following stress calculation. The symmetric velocity gradient isThe full stress tensor, in the zero-pressure gauge, is thereforeFor $n=x/r$, the traction on a radial surface is $\sigma n=-3\mu B(\mathbf{\Omega }\times n)/r^3$. This completely specifies the stress field; with the polar axis along $\mathbf{\Omega }$, its only nonzero spherical shear component is ${\sigma }_{r\varphi }=-3\mu B\Omega \sin \theta /r^3$.

The fluid couple on the inner sphere is the integral of $x\times \sigma n$ with the normal pointing from the solid into the fluid. Using $\int n_i{n}_{j}d\omega =(4\pi /3){\delta }_{ij}$,Hence the sustaining applied Torque in rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isFor $a\ll b$, it approaches the isolated rotating sphere in Stokes flow result $8\pi \mu a^3\mathbf{\Omega }$. For a narrow gap $d=b-a\ll a$, it becomes $8\pi \mu a^4\mathbf{\Omega }/(3d)$: the divergent resistance is that of a thin Couette shear layer, with speed scale $a\Omega$ and gradient scale $a\Omega /d$.

Now add the force-free, couple-free rigid particles and denote the resulting velocity by $u_p$. Extend $u_p$ through each particle as its rigid translational and rotational velocity. No slip makes this extension continuous across every particle surface; it is incompressible and has zero rate-of-strain tensor inside each particle. It therefore gives an admissible trial velocity in the original particle-free annulus, with exactly the same sphere boundary velocities. Its full-annulus dissipation is the actual fluid dissipation ${\mathcal{D}}_p$, since the added interior integrals are zero. The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow consequently gives ${\mathcal{D}}_p\ge {\mathcal{D}}_0$.

The boundary-work identity follows by integrating $\nabla \cdot (\sigma u)$: dissipation equals the mechanical power supplied at all rigid boundaries. The outer sphere is stationary; the inner sphere has no translation, so any force needed to hold its centre does no work; and each added particle contributes zero power because its net force and couple are zero. Thus ${\mathcal{D}}_p={\mathbf{G}}_p\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$, while ${\mathcal{D}}_0={\mathbf{G}}_0\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$. ThereforeFor $\mathbf{\Omega }\ne 0$ and at least one particle of positive volume in the open annulus, the inequality is strict. Equality would make the extended velocity identical to the particle-free solution, yet that solution has nonzero strain on every open region away from the rotation axis and cannot be rigid throughout any particle interior. Hence the applied couple component along the imposed angular velocity increases. This is the fixed-velocity extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion argument; it does not assert an increase in every transverse torque component.

Let $\mathbf{F}$ denote the applied force, and take the normal ${\mathbf{n}}_S$ outward from the solid. At leading order the Stokes drag law and the torque on a rotating sphere in Stokes flow giveThe exact no-slip boundary condition and the exact resultant-load conditions areThe stress condition specifies the total force and torque, not a pointwise prescribed traction.

For the boundary perturbation of a nearly spherical particle, evaluate the no-slip condition at $\mathbf{x}=(a+\epsilon f)\mathbf{n}$. Taylor expansion givesThere is no $f{\mathbf{\Omega }}_0\times \mathbf{n}$ term because ${\mathbf{\Omega }}_0=0$. Therefore

To expand the integral conditions correctly, use surface independence of Stokes force and torque integrals. The Stokes equation implies $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\sigma }=0$, and symmetry of the stress tensor implies that the angular-momentum flux is divergence-free as well. Evaluate the exact force and torque on a fixed sphere of radius $R$ enclosing the perturbed particle. There are then no geometric terms: the $O(\epsilon )$ integrals of ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_1$ on that fixed sphere vanish because the external force and torque have no $O(\epsilon )$ corrections. Each perturbation field solves the homogeneous exterior Stokes equations, so the divergence theorem transfers those integrals back to $r=a$. HenceIf the integrals are expanded directly on the displaced surface, terms involving the displaced evaluation of ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_0$, the changed normal and the changed area do appear individually. Their sum vanishes by the same surface-independence identity. Thus their absence in the final equations is a cancellation, not permission to omit geometric terms independently.

A convenient normalization of the Papkovich–Neuber representation uses a harmonic vector $\mathbf{h}$ and harmonic scalar $\varphi$:Indeed, $\Delta (\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{h})=2\nabla \cdot \mathbf{h}$, so $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}=0$ and $\mu \Delta \mathbf{u}=\nabla p$. This is a rescaling of the usual harmonic-potential representation of Stokes flow.

Measure $\mathbf{x}$ from the sphere center, set $r=|\mathbf{x}|$ and $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{x}/r$. A translational vector harmonic $\mathbf{U}/r$ provides the decaying $1/r$ force field, while the scalar dipole $(\mathbf{U}\cdot \mathbf{x})/r^3$ adjusts the surface velocity without changing that leading far field. For rotation, $(\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x})/r^3$ is harmonic, divergence-free and perpendicular to $\mathbf{x}$. Thus tryThe translational velocity is $\frac{A}{2r}(I+\mathbf{nn})\mathbf{U}-\frac{C}{2r^3}(I-3\mathbf{nn})\mathbf{U}$. Matching its independent tangential and radial components at $r=a$ gives $A=3a/2$, $C=-a^3/2$; matching rotation gives $B=a^3$. ConsequentlyThis superposes the translating sphere in Stokes flow and the rotating sphere in Stokes flow. It is exactly $\mathbf{U}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$ at the sphere and tends to zero at infinity; the additive ambient pressure is set to zero.

Let $n$ point from the sphere into the exterior fluid, so the surface position relative to the centre is $r=an$. The physical surface velocity isFree rotation means the actual body is torque-free: the total hydrodynamic torque $T={\int }_{S}an\times (\sigma \cdot n)dS$ vanishes. Use the auxiliary rotating sphere in Stokes flow with arbitrary $\hat{\Omega }$, boundary velocity $\hat{u}=\hat{\Omega }\times an$ and the given traction $\hat{\sigma }\cdot n=-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\times n$. The auxiliary flow is the decaying exterior rotation of a sphere, not a rigid rotation of the entire infinite fluid.

The left-hand cross-work in the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow isThe other cross-work becomesThe spherical integral identities areUsing $(\Omega \times n)\cdot (\hat{\Omega }\times n)=\Omega \cdot \hat{\Omega }-(\Omega \cdot n)(\hat{\Omega }\cdot n)$, the rotational contribution is $-8\pi \mu a^3\Omega \cdot \hat{\Omega }$. The slip contribution is $-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\cdot {\int }_{S}n\times u^{\prime }dS$. Since $\hat{\Omega }$ is arbitrary, the torque-free rotation of a spherical squirmer satisfiesThe viscosity cancels, as expected for a kinematically prescribed slip in a linear viscous problem. If the freely moving sphere also has a translation $U$, its added cross-work is zero because the auxiliary rotating sphere has zero total force, ${\int }_S\hat{\sigma }\cdot ndS=0$. Thus translation does not alter this rotational formula. Without the torque-free assumption an external-torque contribution would have to be retained.

Use the Papkovich–Neuber representation in the formwhere $\mathbf{\Phi }$ and $\chi$ are harmonic functions. A torque is a axial vector, so rotational covariance and decay select the harmonic vector fieldHere $\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{\Phi }=0$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\Phi }=0$, soThis rotlet equals the rotating sphere in Stokes flowwhen $\mathbf{\Omega }=\mathbf{G}/(8\pi \mu a^3)$. It satisfies the no-slip boundary condition on $r=a$, decays at infinity, and its Newtonian fluid stress tensor transmits the applied couple $\mathbf{G}$.

The Papkovich–Neuber representation writes a homogeneous Stokes flow in terms of a harmonic vector field $\mathbf{\Phi }$ and a harmonic scalar $\chi$ asFor translation, rotational symmetry and decay at infinity restrict the trial harmonic fields to the fundamental harmonic $1/r$ and its directional derivatives contracted with $\mathbf{U}$. For rotation, the only decaying isotropic axial-vector field with the required boundary value is proportional to $\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}/r^3$. Matching the no-slip boundary condition $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{U}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$ at $r=a$ gives the superposition of the translating sphere in Stokes flow and the rotating sphere in Stokes flow:Each term decays at infinity, and direct substitution at $r=a$ gives the prescribed rigid velocity.

When $\mathbf{U}=0$, the pressure is constant and may be set to zero. Differentiating the rotational velocity and using the Newtonian fluid stress tensor gives

At leading order the particle is a sphere. A pure applied couple produces no translation, while torque balance with the rotating sphere in Stokes flow givesWith $mathbfn$ directed from the particle into the fluid, the exact conditions on the true surface $S$ areEvaluate no slip at $mathbf{x}_s=(a+\epsilon f)\mathbf{n}$ and expand about $mathbfx=a\mathbf{n}$. The order-$\epsilon$ terms give

The divergence of the Newtonian stress vanishes in the surrounding fluid, and its symmetry makes the divergence of angular-momentum flux vanish as well. The total force and torque may therefore be evaluated on any homologous enclosing surface, in particular the fixed reference sphere. Since the applied force is zero and the applied couple is fixed independently of $\epsilon$,Using a fixed enclosing sphere is also why no separate terms involving the shape $f$ and leading stress ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_0$ appear.

If the otherwise force-free second sphere is held against rotation, its angular velocity relative to the incident fluid is $-3a({\mathbf{U}}_0\times \mathbf{n})/(4R^2)$. The rotlet reflected back to the first sphere addsThis follows by evaluating the rotating sphere in Stokes flow at displacement $-R\mathbf{n}$ and using the vector triple-product identity. The holding couple does no work because the held sphere's angular velocity is zero.

A rotlet is the singular Stokes flow generated by a point torque $\mathbf{G}$:It is the far field of a rotating sphere in Stokes flow.

For a sphere of radius $a$ with prescribed surface slip $u^{\prime }$ and zero external torque, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow giveswhere $n$ points from the sphere into the fluid. Use an auxiliary rotating sphere in Stokes flow with arbitrary angular velocity $\hat{\Omega }$ and traction $-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\times n$. The actual torque-free cross-work vanishes. Substituting the boundary velocity $\Omega \times an+u^{\prime }$ into the other cross-work leaves $-8\pi \mu a^3\hat{\Omega }\cdot \Omega -3\mu \hat{\Omega }\cdot \int n\times u^{\prime }=0$. A possible translation contributes zero because the auxiliary net force is zero.