COPASETIC FLOW

COPASETIC FLOW
SUBSCRIBE
SUBSCRIBE

Cool Math Tricks: Deriving the

Divergence, (Del or Nabla) into
New (Cylindrical) Coordinate
Systems

March 01, 2009

ebook for 99 cents! Get a spiffy

ebook, and fund more physics

The following is a pretty lengthy procedure, but

converting the divergence, (nabla, del) operator

between coordinate systems comes up pretty often.

While there are tables for converting between

common coordinate systems, there seem to be fewer

explanations of the procedure for deriving the

conversion, so here goes!

What do we actually want?

To convert the Cartesian nabla

to the nabla for another coordinate system, say…

cylindrical coordinates.

What we’ll need:

1. The Cartesian Nabla:

2. A set of equations relating the Cartesian

coordinates to cylindrical coordinates:

3. A set of equations relating the Cartesian basis

vectors to the basis vectors of the new coordinate

system:

How to do it:

Use the chain rule for differentiation to convert the

derivatives with respect to the Cartesian variables to

derivatives with respect to the cylindrical variables.

The chain rule can be used to convert a differential

operator in terms of one variable into a series of

differential operators in terms of other variables that

the first variable depends on. This is exactly what we

need because we want to start out with a differential

operator in terms of x,

in our Cartesian to cylindrical example and convert it

to differential operators in terms of the cylindrical

variables, . For x, the chain rule gives us:

NOTE: More generally, if you’re given a differential

operator in terms of a variable, u, that can be

expressed in terms of n other variables, v, then to

convert the differential operator in terms of u to

differential operators in terms of the v’s the chain rule

gives:

This is explained very nicely and in more detail here

and here.

OK, so let’s get to work converting the three

differential operators of the Cartesian nabla into

differential operators in terms of cylindrical

coordinates. We start with x,

using,

We can construct the first differential term above as:

but, we really need to get all the x’s and y’s out of the

mix and just have cylindrical coordinates remaining.

So, using a few substitutions we get:

Now, follow the same procedure for the next

differential term in the chain rule.

Remember though that r depends on x and y, so when

we differentiate, we need to expand r and use the

simple one-variable chain rule. Using a table of

derivates for the arccosine, we get:

The final derivative is taken using the quotient rule:

We already know from our work above that

so

Now, we start the lengthy process of simplifying:

Because z is the same z as in the Cartesian system, it

doesn’t depend on x, (exactly as in the Cartesian

system), so we have

and our complete conversion for the x derivative term

is:

Now use the same techniques to convert the

differential for y:

Starting in a similar manner:

Then, evaluating the second term of the chain rule we

get:

Remember again that r depends on x and y, so when

we differentiate, we need to expand r and use the one

variable chain rule.

The final derivative is taken using the quotient rule:

We already know from our work above that

so

Now, we simplify again:

So,

Finally, since z is not transformed between coordinate

systems:

Now that we have each differential converted, we can

write the nabla operator as

Which is kind of a mess! We know that when we’re

finished we expect to see nicely grouped cylindrical

differential terms with cylindrical unit vectors, so let’s

group on the cylindrical differentials

Now remembering our original definition of

cylindrical unit vectors,

We can make two more substitutions and arrive at

the final result for nabla in cylindrical coordinates!

LABELS: CARTESIAN COORDINATES,

COOL MATH TRICKS, COVERSION, CURL,

CYLINDRICAL COORDINATES, DIVERGENCE,

MATHEMATICS, NABLA, PHYSICS

SHARE

Comments Community !
1 Login

% Recommend 1 Sort by Best

Join the discussion…

LOG IN WITH

OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS ?

Name

Frew Cen
− ⚑
2 years ago

I love you.
1△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
4 years ago

Thank you a lot man!!!

△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
4 years ago

thanxs bro.. great help

△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
4 years ago

Awesome stuff man!

Your work saved me a lot of time
Thanks a lot
△ ▽ Reply
Alexandre Santiago
− ⚑
4 years ago

Thanks a lot. I was searching for this material

and I found great your explanation !!

△ ▽ Reply
Unknown
− ⚑
4 years ago

Thanks a lot. I was searching for this material

and I found great your explanation !!

△ ▽ Reply
Amal Biswas
− ⚑
5 years ago

awesome
△ ▽ Reply
Hamilton
− ⚑
7 years ago

Hi Doughboy,
Is the following for spherical coordinates about
what you had in mind?
http://copaseticflow.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-
intuitive-way-to-spherical-gradient.html

Thanks again! You made my homework this

week a lot easier and much more of a learning
experience, (in a good way).
△ ▽ Reply
Hamilton
− ⚑
7 years ago

This comment has been removed by the author.

△ ▽ Reply
Hamilton
− ⚑
7 years ago

Thank you Doughboy! That's an awesome

pointer! It took me awhile to work through all the
details of what you said, but in the end it's far
easier and left me with a physical understanding
of the derivation instead of just a mechanical list
of steps. Expect to see a post on deriving the
spherical laplacian in this way soon. Thanks
again!
△ ▽ Reply
Doughboy
− ⚑
7 years ago

Your derivation is great, but it's too lengthy. You

can actually derive it starting with the definition
of divergence, which is the limit as the volume of
a closed surface approaches zero of the flux
through that surface. Taking the surface as the
standard differential volume unit in cylindrical
coordinates, you can directly derive it much
more quickly than going through the chain rule
and coordinate transformations.
△ ▽ Reply
mani
− ⚑
8 years ago

hi,
i'm from india and i found your explanation
extremely helpful.i was able to derive
expressions for divergence and curl on my own
by following a method similar to yours.
it was enlightening.
thanks.
△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
10 years ago

Firstly, thanks for this, I've been trying in vain to

derive something similar and I've finally noticed
that I've been using the wrong transformation of
unit vectors!

Similarly to previous comments, this particular

result falls out fairly quickly when you note that
r_x = cos(phi); r_y = sin(phi); phi_x = -sin(phi)/r
and phi_y=cos(phi)/r. Otherwise a good exercise
in the chain rule!
△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
10 years ago

Found your tutorial on google. Very nicely done.

Thank you!
△ ▽ Reply
John F.
− ⚑
10 years ago

Hi,
Good article. I noticed a shortcut for d phi / dx
and d phi / dy. If you use phi = arctan(y/x),
d phi / dx = 1/(1+(y/x)^2).d/dx(y/x)
=-1/(1+(y/x)^2).y/x^2
=-y/(x^2+y^2)
=-sin(phi)/r
similar for d phi/dy, and avoids a lot of messy
algebra.
△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
10 years ago

Thank you....

great help!

--Su
△ ▽ Reply
Anonymous
− ⚑
10 years ago

Hi Hamilton,

very nice tutorial. Following your reasoning I was

able to derive the Nabla from Cartesian
coordinate system to my own defined non-
standard spherical coordinate system. And it
worked perfectly!

Thanks again.

Hernan
△ ▽ Reply

✉ Subscribe $ Privacy Policy

Popular posts from this blog

Division: Distributing the Work

March 31, 2018

Our unschooling math comes in bits and pieces. The

oldest kid here, seven year-old No. 1 loves math