Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The advection-diffusion equation was $\frac{\partial c}{\partial t} = \nabla \cdot (D\nabla c) - \nabla \cdot (vc) + R$ where $c$ is a scalar (the concentration) and $v=(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 )$ is a vector (the velocity). I assumed everything could be a function of the three space coordinates $x, y, z$ and the time $t$. Then the equation becomes

$$ \begin{align*} \frac{\partial c}{\partial t} & = D\left(\frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial x^2} + \frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial y^2} + \frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial z^2}\right) + \frac{\partial D}{\partial x}\frac{\partial c}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial D}{\partial y}\frac{\partial c}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial D}{\partial z}\frac{\partial c}{\partial z} - \frac{\partial (cv_1)}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial (cv_2)}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial (cv_3)}{\partial z} + R\\ & = D\left(\frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial x^2} + \frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial y^2} + \frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial z^2}\right) + \left(\frac{\partial D}{\partial x} - v_1\right)\frac{\partial c}{\partial x} + \left(\frac{\partial D}{\partial y} - v_2\right)\frac{\partial c}{\partial y} + \left(\frac{\partial D}{\partial z} - v_3\right)\frac{\partial c}{\partial z} - c\left(\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial v_2}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial v_3}{\partial z}\right) + R \end{align*} $$

I don't know what else you want. Of course if e.g. $D$ is constant you can set the partial derivatives of $D$ to $0$ , or if the flow is incompressible you can set $\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial v_2}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial v_3}{\partial z}$ to $0$ . But no such assumptions were made in the original question.

My university advisor has told me that the problem may be solved as a one dimensional case or with just one dimensional coordinate, such as the x coordinate. If this is the case, would the equation then become:

$$ \frac{\partial c}{\partial t} = D\left(\frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial x^2}\right) + \left(\frac{\partial D}{\partial x} - v_1\right)\frac{\partial c}{\partial x} - c\left(\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial x}\right) + R $$

Is this form correct? If so, how do I set it up for integration?

share|improve this question
1  
Please don't quote (in this case my answer to math.stackexchange.com/questions/190610/…) without attribution. –  Robert Israel Sep 5 '12 at 6:36
add comment

1 Answer

The 1D problem has the form $$ \frac{\partial c}{\partial t} = A(x)\frac{\partial^2 c}{\partial x^2} + B(x)\frac{\partial c}{\partial x} + C(x)c + D(x). $$

The solution method depends on the domain of $x$ (I assume $t \ge 0$), $A$, $B$, $C$, $D$ and boundary conditions. I will assume the boundary conditions are homogeneous. (If they are just affine, you can add something to make them homogeneous.) Let $M$ be an operator defined by $$ M = A\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} + B\frac{\partial}{\partial x} + C. $$ The above equation can be rewritten as $$ \frac{\partial c}{\partial t} = Mc + D. $$

If the domain of $x$ is finite and does not contain any zeroes of $A$, one common method is eigenfunction expansion: Assume $c(x, t) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty c_n(t)u_n(x)$ where $Mu_n = \lambda_n u_n$. Also, express $D(x)$ as $D(x) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty D_nu_n(x)$. (Make sure the correct inner product is used.) Substitute back into the PDE and solve for $c_n(t)$.

If the domain of $x$ is infinite, you might need a transform method. Laplace transform (for $x \ge 0$) or Fourier transform (for $x \in \mathbb R$) may work out nicely if $A, B, C, D$ aren't too nasty.

And as Robert said, you can choose to do Laplace transform in $t$ first too.

share|improve this answer
1  
You can also try Laplace transform in the $t$ variable. –  Robert Israel Sep 5 '12 at 6:43
    
Yes, you can do that too. Thanks, Robert. I'll include that in the answer as well. –  Tunococ Sep 5 '12 at 6:47
    
In your sentence “Assume c(x,t) = …..where Mun = λnun”, What is “un”? –  steve scoville Sep 7 '12 at 4:23
    
$(\lambda_n, u_n)$ is an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of the operator $M$. That means you have to solve for all possible pairs $(\lambda, u)$ from the equation $Mu = \lambda u$. If your domain is finite, boundary conditions will make the set of possible $\lambda$ countable. Then you can use an integer $n$ to index them. –  Tunococ Sep 10 '12 at 20:54
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.