gtspring2009:spieker_blog:ub_eigenvectors:color_scaling

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||

gtspring2009:spieker_blog:ub_eigenvectors:color_scaling [2009/04/03 11:20] wikiadmin |
gtspring2009:spieker_blog:ub_eigenvectors:color_scaling [2010/02/02 07:55] (current) |
||
---|---|---|---|

Line 19: | Line 19: | ||

Sorry, I forgot to rescale these before I posted them. | Sorry, I forgot to rescale these before I posted them. | ||

- | {{gtspring2009:gibson.png?24}} In this case the scaling of the field and the color scale is closely related to the question of whether or not to add the laminar flow to the field. By adding the laminar flow in and scaling the eigenvector, you are plotting %%laminar + scale * eigenvector%%, a linear combination of two unrelated fluid states. The //shapes// in the plot will be quite dependent on the relative strength of the two different fields in the sum. On the other hand, if you leave the laminar flow out and just plot %%scale * eigenvector%%, the shapes will be constant but the color scale will be more or less intense. If you are interested in understanding the eigenvector, the latter is preferable: you see the shape of the eigenvector, not the eigenvector mixed with an unrelated fluid state. | + | {{gtspring2009:gibson.png?24}} In this case the scaling of the field and the color scale is closely related to the question of whether or not to add the laminar flow to the field. By adding the laminar flow in and scaling the eigenvector, you are plotting %%(laminar + scale * eigenvector)%%, a linear combination of two unrelated fluid states. The //shapes// in the plot will be quite dependent on the relative strength of the two different fields in the sum. On the other hand, if you leave the laminar flow out and just plot %%(scale * eigenvector)%%, the shapes will be constant but the color scale will be more or less intense. If you are interested in understanding the eigenvector, the latter is preferable: you see the shape of the eigenvector, not the eigenvector mixed with an unrelated fluid state. |

- | You might also be interested in plotting %%equilibrium + scale * eigenvector%%, or %%laminar + equilibrium + scale * eigenvector%%. These are linear combinations of fluid states with physical meaning: both show a perturbation along the unstable manifold of an equilibrium, with and without the laminar flow. | + | You might also be interested in plotting %%(equilibrium + scale * eigenvector)%%, or %%(laminar + equilibrium + scale * eigenvector)%%. These are linear combinations of fluid states with physical meaning: both show a perturbation along the unstable manifold of an equilibrium, with and without the laminar flow. |

- | But, as I wrote [[gtspring2009:spieker_blog:ub_eigenvectors:laminar|elsewhere]], | + | But, as I wrote [[gtspring2009:spieker_blog:ub_eigenvectors:laminar|elsewhere]], %%(laminar + scale * eigenvector)%% doesn't make much sense. It's a perturbation of one equilibrium (laminar) along |

- | %%laminar + scale * eigenvector%% doesn't make much sense. It's a perturbation of one equilibrium (laminar) along | + | |

**another** equilibrium's eigenfunction. | **another** equilibrium's eigenfunction. | ||

+ | |||

P.S. I rescaled the figs with dokuwiki image commands: %%{{fig.png?200}}%% rescales fig.png to 200 pixels width. | P.S. I rescaled the figs with dokuwiki image commands: %%{{fig.png?200}}%% rescales fig.png to 200 pixels width. |

gtspring2009/spieker_blog/ub_eigenvectors/color_scaling.txt · Last modified: 2010/02/02 07:55 (external edit)