1
$\begingroup$

I have the PDE for the homogeneous heat equation (partial derivative of u with respect to time equals the second partial derivative of u with respect to x) with the following Dirichlet boundary and initial conditions:

$$ \\ u(0,t) = t\\ u(1,t) = 0 \\ u(x,0) = x(1-x)$$

I have non-homogeneous boundary conditions, so we propose $ u(x,t) = w(x,t) + U(x)$, with $U(x)$ the stationary solution (as time approaches infinity, the solution $u(x,t)$ approaches $U(x)$, so $w(x,t)$ is the transient part of my solution.

Separating the problem in two others, for $U(x)$ and $w(x,t)$, I get quite confused as in what should be the boundary condition for $U(0)$, since $u(0,t) = t$ is time-dependent.

If I solve for $U(x)$ with conditions $U(0) = t$ and $U(1) = 0$, I get $U(x) = Ax+B$, so we conclude that $U(x) = -tx + t$; and then, solving for $w(x,t)$, we have from $u(x,t) = w(x,t) + U(x)$: $$w(x,0) = x(1-x) - (-tx+t) = (x-t)(1-x) $$

The problem is that when I find the transient solution (for $w(x,t)$), to determine the coefficients for its series representation, I need to apply our initial condition $w(x,0) = (x-t)(1-x)$ to find the Fourier series and find the complete solution for the problem.

Note: I am not sure if that initial condition makes sense, since it is time dependent, even though $t=0$. Apart from that, I have no idea how to construct the periodic extension to find a Fourier series that matches my condition, since it's multivariable.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Your initial form of the solution is incorrect: since the boundary conditions depend on $t$, the long-time behaviour does not tend to a stationary solution.

Instead, notice that the function $t(1-x)$ satisfies the boundary conditions, and is zero at $t=0$. Therefore, we can change the problem to have homogeneous boundary conditions by writing $u(x,t)=t(1-x)+v(x,t)$, and now $v(x,t)$ has homogeneous boundary conditions $v(0,t)=v(1,t)=0$. But $v(x,t)$ doesn't satisfy the heat equation any more; instead we have $$ v_t-v_{xx} = (u-t(1-x))_t-(u-t(1-x))_{xx} = x-1. \tag{1} $$ But again, the heat equation is linear, so we can write $v(x,t)=w(x,t)+U(x,t)$, where both functions have homogeneous boundary conditions, but $U(x,t)$ solves the heat equation, $w(x,t)$ the modified equation (1), and $w(x,0)+U(x,0)=x(1-x)$. Admittedly at this point this doesn't look very useful, but note the boundaries are curves of constant $x$. Let's pretend for a moment that $w(x,t)=w(x)$ alone, then $w$ satisfies $$ w''=1-x, w(0)=w(1)=1, $$ which is easy to solve, and gives $w=-\frac{1}{6}x(1-x)(2-x)$. So we can choose this $w$ to return to something that satisfies the heat equation, at the expense of modifying the initial condition satisfied by $U$. In other words, we have $$ u(x,t) = (1-x)(t-\tfrac{1}{6}x(2-x))+U(x,t), $$ and so $U$ must satisfy the heat equation, $U_t-U_{xx}=0$, and the initial condition $$ U(x,0) = x(1-x)+\tfrac{1}{6}x(1-x)(2-x). $$ And then you can go on to separate variables and solve for $U$ in the usual way.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Instead of writing U only with x as a variable, I also put t as a variable. My problem was that I assumed instantly that the partial derivative of U with respect to t was zero, but it isn't. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – DrHAL Oct 23 '15 at 9:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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