Original Article

International Journal of Mechanical

Engineering Education
Derivation of the 0(0) 1–10
! The Author(s) 2021
differential continuity Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
equation in an DOI: 10.1177/03064190211014460
journals.sagepub.com/home/ijj

introductory engineering
fluid mechanics course

EM Wahba

Abstract
The differential continuity equation is elegantly derived in advanced fluid mechanics text-
books using the divergence theorem of Gauss, where the surface integral of the mass flux
flowing out of a finite control volume is replaced by the volume integral of the divergence
of the mass flux within the control volume. To avoid the need for introducing the Gauss
divergence theorem in an introductory fluid mechanics course, introductory textbooks in
fluid mechanics have opted to use a more simple approach, which depends on the con-
sideration of an infinitesimal control volume and the use of Taylor series expansion.
This approach, however, involves a first order truncation of the Taylor series expansion
and the use of approximate equality signs which may imply to undergraduate students that
the derived continuity equation is an approximate equation. The present study proposes an
alternative derivation of the differential continuity equation using a finite control volume
and is based on the simple concept of the antiderivative function and the fundamental
theorem of calculus. The proposed derivation eliminates the need to formally introduce
the Gauss divergence theorem in an introductory engineering fluid mechanics course while
avoiding the use of truncated Taylor series expansion and approximate equality signs, hence
providing a more simple and sound understanding of the derivation of the differential
continuity equation to undergraduate engineering students.

Keywords
Differential continuity equation, mass conservation, fluid mechanics

Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Corresponding author:
EM Wahba, Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria,
Egypt. Email: emwahba@yahoo.com
2 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 0(0)

Introduction and historical perspective

The derivation of the differential form of the continuity equation in fluid mechanics
passed through many manifestations over the years.1 Rouse and Ince2 report that the
earliest known expression for a relationship between cross-sectional area, velocity,
volume, and time dates back to the discussions of Heron of Alexandria (10 – 85
AD) regarding flow from a spring. Rouse and Ince2 also state that one of the earliest
accounts of flow continuity in rivers was documented in the manuscripts of Leonardo
da Vinci (1452–1519). Later, mass conservation in pipes and open channels was treated
by Daniel Bernoulli using the hypothesis of parallel sections, where it is assumed that at
any plane section perpendicular to the channel, all fluid particles flow with the same
velocity perpendicular to the plane, and that this velocity is inversely proportional to
the magnitude of the section.3 Derivations by d’Alembert for axisymmetric and two-
dimensional steady flows paved the way for the famed Euler’s derivation of the dif-
ferential continuity equation for three-dimensional unsteady flow.1
Interestingly at that time, and contrary to current practice, the derivation of the
differential continuity equation was based on considering a moving three-
dimensional fluid element at time t and calculating the shape and volume of this
element at time tþdt. According to Craik,1 the first documented derivations for the
differential continuity equation using the concept of a fixed volume in space and
considering the net mass flowing into it, were those of Duhamel4 and Thomson.5 In
his study, Thomson5 clearly showed and stated that the derivation of the continuity
equation using a fixed volume in space is much simpler than considering a moving
fluid element and calculating its shape and volume at different time instants.
With later developments in vector and tensor notation, more compact derivations
of the differential continuity equation followed, which were based on the consider-
ation of an arbitrary fixed control volume in space and the elegant implementation
of the divergence theorem of Gauss to convert surface integrals of the mass flux to
volume integrals of the divergence of the mass flux. Here, we define mass flux as the
mass flow rate per unit area. Such derivation of the differential continuity equation
based on applying the divergence theorem of Gauss to an arbitrary control volume
became the norm in most fluid mechanics textbooks in the mid-twentieth century.6,7
With developments in engineering education during the twentieth century and
with fluid mechanics being a basic course which serves several engineering pro-
grams such as mechanical engineering, civil engineering and chemical engineering,
many textbooks were developed with the main purpose of serving undergraduate
engineering students taking a first course in fluid mechanics. With the background
of a junior undergraduate engineering student in mind, most of these textbooks
provided an alternative derivation to the differential continuity equation, in which
the divergence theorem of Gauss is not needed. Instead, an infinitesimal control
volume is considered, and Taylor series expansion is used to evaluate mass fluxes
on the surfaces of the control volume.
This alternative derivation, however, involves a first order truncation of the
Taylor series expansion and the use of approximate equality signs which may
Wahba 3

imply to undergraduate engineering students that the derived continuity equation is

an approximate equation. As such, the present study attempts to provide an alter-
native derivation of the differential continuity equation. The proposed derivation
uses a finite control volume instead of an infinitesimal one, and is based on the
simple concept of the antiderivative function and the fundamental theorem of cal-
culus. The proposed derivation eliminates the need to formally introduce the Gauss
divergence theorem in an introductory engineering fluid mechanics course while
avoiding the use of truncated Taylor series expansion and approximate equality
signs, hence providing a more simple and sound understanding of the derivation
of the differential continuity equation to undergraduate engineering students.
The present study proceeds as follows. We first recapitulate the derivation of the
differential continuity equation in several well-known advanced and introductory
fluid mechanics textbooks. We then proceed to develop the proposed alternative
derivation for the continuity equation and provide comparisons with the approach
currently used by present-day introductory fluid mechanics textbooks.

Derivation of the continuity equation in advanced fluid

mechanics textbooks
Four advanced fluid mechanics textbooks are considered in the present study.
The first two are well-known classical mid-twentieth century textbooks by Landau
and Lifshitz6 and Batchelor.7 The other two are more recent twenty-first century
textbooks by Graebel8 and Kundu and Cohen.9 All four textbooks are mainly used
by either senior undergraduate engineering students or first year graduate engineering
students, and all of them derive the differential mass conservation equation in a similar
manner. As such, we consider here the derivation provided by Batchelor7 where he
considers a finite volume V whose position is fixed in space and entirely occupied by
the fluid. Surface A is defined as the closed surface surrounding the fixed Rvolume V.
The mass of the fluid enclosed within the control volume atR any instant is qdV and
the net rate at which mass is flowing out of the volume is qu  ndA, where q is the
fluid density and n is the unit outward normal of the surface A. Mass conservation
implies that the increase in the mass of the fluid inside the control volume is equal to
the net rate at which mass is flowing into the control volume, hence
Z Z
d
qdV ¼  qu  ndA (1)
dt
R R
Applying Gauss divergence theorem r  ðquÞdV ¼ qu  ndA and noting that
differentiation is permitted under the integral since the control volume V is fixed in
space results in
Z  
@q
þ r  ðquÞ dV ¼ 0 (2)
@t
4 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 0(0)

Since equation (2) is valid for any choice of volume V, the integrand must
vanish resulting the final form for the differential continuity equation
@q
þ r  ðquÞ ¼ 0 (3)
@t

Derivation of the continuity equation in introductory fluid

mechanics textbooks
Four well-known introductory fluid mechanics textbooks are considered in the pre-
sent study. They include the textbooks by Cengel and Cimbala,10 Fox et al.,11
Munson et al.12 and White.13 All four textbooks are frequently used by undergrad-
uate engineering students in a first fluid mechanics course, and all of them derive the
differential continuity equation in a similar manner. As such, we provide here the
derivation of Cengel and Cimbala10 as an example to the approach used by all four
textbooks. Reynolds transport theorem is used to obtain the expression for mass
conservation for a control volume with well-defined inlets and outlets
Z X X
@q
dV ¼ m_ in  m_ out (4)
@t
Figure 1 shows the considered infinitesimal control volume, where a first order
truncation of Taylor series expansion is used about point P to obtain the mass
fluxes for the six surfaces of the infinitesimal control volume. Cengel and
Cimbala10 state that as the control volume shrinks to a point, the volume integral
in equation (4) is approximated as
Z
@q @q
dV ffi dxdydz (5)
@t @t

Figure 1. Infinitesimal control volume used in introductory fluid mechanics textbooks.

Wahba 5

Moreover, the right-hand side of equation (4) is evaluated using the mass flux
approximations given in Figure 1 resulting in

X X @ ðquÞ @ ðqvÞ @ ðqwÞ

m_ in  m_ out ffi  dxdydz  dxdydz  dxdydz (6)
@x @y @z

Equating equations (5) and (6) results in the final form of the differential con-
tinuity equation

@q @ ðquÞ @ ðqvÞ @ ðqwÞ

þ þ þ ¼0 (7)
@t @x @y @z

Proposed derivation for the differential continuity equation

The first difference between the proposed derivation and the one currently used in
introductory fluid mechanics textbooks is the use of a finite control volume instead
of an infinitesimal one. Figure 2 shows the finite control volume used in the der-
ivation. It consists of a parallelopiped whose position is fixed in space and occupies
the region ðx1  x  x2 ; y1  y  y2 ; z1  z  z2 Þ. Mass conservation for such
control volume states that the rate of change of mass within the control volume is
equal to the net rate at which mass flows into the control volume
Z X X
@q
dV ¼ m_in  m_out (8)
@t

It should be noted here that the balance principle is used to write equation (8),
instead of using Reynolds transport theorem as in most introductory fluid mechan-
ics textbooks, where the balance principle is easier to grasp by undergraduate
engineering students.14 The balance principle simply states that the rate of increase

Figure 2. Finite control volume for proposed derivation of the differential continuity equation.
6 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 0(0)

of any extensive property B within a control volume is equal to the sum of the net
rate of creation of B within the control volume and the net rate at which B crosses
the control surface into the control volume. Reynolds transport theorem, on the
other hand, applies a more formal mathematical approach to derive the relation
between the time rate of change of an extensive property for a control mass and
time rate of change of an extensive property for a control volume.
Moreover, a second difference is noted here between the proposed derivation
and the one commonly used in introductory fluid mechanics textbooks. In present-
day introductory fluid mechanics textbooks, the computation of the rate of change
R @q
of mass within the infinitesimal control volume is approximated as @t dV ffi
@q
@t dxdydz. In the present proposed derivation, a finite control volume is considered
and the exact volume integral to compute the rate of change of mass within the
control volume is retained.
Figure 2 also shows the mass flux for each surface of the control volume.
It should be noted here that the mass flux is defined within an Eulerian framework
and hence is a function of both space and time. We proceed to compute the net rate
of mass flowing out of the control volume in the x-direction by integrating the
mass flux over the area as follows
Z z2 Z y2
½quðx2 ; y; z; tÞ  quðx1 ; y; z; tÞdydz (9)
z1 y1

The fundamental theorem of calculus and the concept of the antiderivative

function is one of the simplest concepts in calculus and is easily grasped by engi-
neering students. It simply relates
Rb the definite integral of a function to the net
change in its antiderivative a f0 ðxÞdx ¼ fðbÞ  fðaÞ. Applying the fundamental
theorem of calculus to evaluate the term in brackets in equation (9) results in
Z x2 @ ðquÞ
dx ¼ quðx2 ; y; z; tÞ  quðx1 ; y; z; tÞ (10)
x1 @x

Substituting from equation (10) into equation (9) provides the net rate of mass
flowing out of the control volume in the x-direction
Z Z Z
z2 y2 x2 @ ðquÞ
dxdydz (11)
z1 y1 x1 @x

In similar fashion, equations (12) and (13) provide the net rate of mass flowing
out of the control volume in the y-direction and in the z-direction, respectively,
Z Z Z
z2 y2 x2 @ ðqvÞ
dxdydz (12)
z1 y1 x1 @y
Wahba 7

Z Z Z
z2 y2 x2 @ ðqwÞ
(13)
z1 y1 x1 @z

A third difference is noted here between the approach commonly used in

introductory fluid mechanics textbooks and the present proposed approach.
In these textbooks, truncated Taylor series expansions are used to approximate
the mass flux on the right and left faces of the infinitesimal control volume as
@ ðquÞ @ ðquÞ dx
ðquÞcenter of right face ffi qu þ @x dx 2 and ðquÞcenter of left face ffi qu  @x 2 , respec-
tively. In the present proposed approach, the use of Taylor series expansion is
omitted all together and replaced by the use of the fundamental theorem of cal-
culus and the concept of the antiderivative function.
Moreover, a fourth difference is also noted where current introductory
fluid mechanics textbooks compute the net rate of mass crossing each surface
by multiplying the mass flux at the center of the surface by the area of the surface.
As such, the mass flow rates across the right face and left face of the infinitesimal
h i
@ qu
control volume are given as ðm_ Þright face ffi qu þ ð@x Þ dx ð_Þ
2 dydz and m left face ffi
h i
@ ðquÞ dx
qu  @x 2 dydz, respectively. In the present approach, a more formal procedure
is applied where an exact area integral is used to evaluate the mass flow rate
Rz Ry
crossing the right surface ðm_ Þright face ¼ z12 y12 quðx2 ; y; z; tÞdydz and the mass
Rz Ry
flow rate crossing the left surface ðm_ Þleft face ¼ z 2 y 2 quðx1 ; y; z; tÞdydz.
1 1
Combining equations (11) to (13) provides the net rate of mass flowing out of
the control volume as follows

X X Z  
@ ðquÞ @ ðqvÞ @ ðqwÞ
m_  m_ ¼ þ þ dV (14)
out in @x @y @z

Substituting from equation (14) into equation (8) and simplifying results in
Z  
@q @ ðquÞ @ ðqvÞ @ ðqwÞ
þ þ þ dV ¼ 0 (15)
@t @x @y @z

As stated before, since equation (15) is valid for any choice of volume V, the
integrand must vanish resulting in the final form for the differential continuity
equation

@q @ ðquÞ @ ðqvÞ @ ðqwÞ

þ þ þ ¼0 (16)
@t @x @y @z

Table 1 provides a comparison between the proposed approach for deriving the
differential continuity equation and the approaches commonly used by the four
 8

Table 1. Summary and comparison of the derivation of the differential continuity equation in introductory fluid mechanics textbooks.

Computation Computation of
Computation of mass flux mass flow rate
of rate of at each surface of across each surface
Type of change of mass the control volume of the control
control within the (right face as volume (right face
volume control volume an example) as an example)
h i
@ ðquÞ dx @ qu
Cengel and Cimbala10 Infinitesimal ffi @q
@t dxdydz ffi qu þ @x 2 ffi qu þ ð@x Þ dx2 dydz
h i
@ ðquÞ dx @ qu
Fox et al.11 Infinitesimal ffi @q
@t dxdydz ffi qu þ @x 2 ffi qu þ ð@x Þ dx2 dydz
h i
@ ðquÞ dx @ qu
Munson et al.12 Infinitesimal ffi @q
@t dxdydz ffi qu þ @x 2 ffi qu þ ð@x Þ dx2 dydz
h i
@ ðquÞ @ qu
White13 Infinitesimal ffi @q
@t dxdydz ffi qu þ @x dx ffi qu þ ð@x Þ dx dydz
R @q Rz Ry
Present approach Finite ¼ @t dV ¼ quðx2 ; y; z; tÞ ¼ z12 y12 quðx2 ; y; z; tÞdydz
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 0(0)
Wahba 9

well-known introductory fluid mechanics textbooks of Cengel and Cimbala,10

Fox et al.,11 Munson et al.12 and White.13 Table 1 also provides a summary of
the various approximations used in deriving the differential continuity equation
using an infinitesimal control volume in these textbooks.

Discussion and concluding remarks

The derivation of the differential continuity equation in introductory fluid
mechanics textbooks is mainly based on the consideration of an infinitesimal con-
trol volume and the use of Taylor series expansion. Such an approach avoids the
need to introduce the divergence theorem of Gauss to undergraduate engineering
students in an introductory fluid mechanics course. However, this approach
involves a first order truncation of the Taylor series expansion and the use of
approximate equality signs which may imply to undergraduate students that the
derived continuity equation is an approximate equation. An alternative derivation
is proposed in the present study, which is based on a finite control volume and the
simple concept of the antiderivative function and the fundamental theorem of
calculus. The present derivation provides a more simple and sound understanding
of the derivation of the differential continuity equation to undergraduate engineer-
ing students, as it eliminates the use of truncated Taylor series expansion and
approximate equality signs while also avoiding the introduction of the divergence
theorem of Gauss in an introductory fluid mechanics course.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.

ORCID iD
EM Wahba https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2015-1290

References
1. Craik AD. Continuity and change”: representing mass conservation in fluid mechanics.
Arch Hist Exact Sci 2013; 67: 43–80.
2. Rouse H and Ince S. History of hydraulics. Corr. ed. New York: Dover, 1963.
3. Truesdell CA. Rational fluid mechanics, 1687–1765. Editor’s introduction to Euleri opera
omnia. ser. 2, XII. Lausanne: Orell Füssli, 1954.
4. Duhamel JMC. Cours de m ecole polytechnique (2 vols). Paris: Bachelier,
ecanique de l’
1845–1846.
5. Thomson W. Notes on hydrodynamics: I. On the equation of continuity. Cambridge
Dublin Math J 1847; 2: 282–286.
10 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 0(0)

6. Landau LD and Lifshitz EM. Fluid mechanics (Trans Sykes JB and Reid WH). Oxford:
Pergamon, 1959.
7. Batchelor GK. An introduction to fluid dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1967.
8. Graebel W. Advanced fluid mechanics. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, 2007.
9. Kundu PK and Cohen I. Fluid mechanics. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press,
2008.
10. Cengel YA and Cimbala JM. Fluid mechanics: fundamentals and applications. 3rd ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014.
11. Fox RW, McDonald AT and Pritchard PJ. Fluid mechanics. 8th ed. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 2012.
12. Munson BR, Okiishi TH, Huebsch WW, et al. Fluid mechanics. 7th ed. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 2013.
13. White FM. Fluid mechanics. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
14. Gray DD and Huebsch WW. The balance principle and the Reynolds transport theorem
in introductory fluid mechanics. Int J Mech Eng Educ 2018; 46: 195–209.