0
$\begingroup$

I am trying to solve a standard PDE, but I got stuck on how to choose the separation constant such that I do not end up with a trivial, uninteresting solution. The system is presented below and my solution thus far.

$\left\{\begin{array}{ll}u_{t}(x,t)-\alpha u_{xx}(x,t)=C,\quad 0<x<L,\quad t>0\\u_{x}(0,t)=0,\quad u(L,t)=0,\quad t>0\\u(x,0)=0,\quad 0<x<L\end{array}\right.$

I begin by defining $w(x)$ so that it satisfies the following equation $\alpha w''(x)+C=0$ (this will turn the problem into a homogenous system by setting $u(x,t)=v(x,t)+w(x)$, where $v(x,t)$ is another function I define). The solution to the ODE above is $w(x)=\frac{C}{2\alpha}(L^2-x^2)$, using the boundary conditions above. Now, the new homogeneous system becomes:

$\left\{\begin{array}{ll}v_{t}(x,t)-\alpha v_{xx}(x,t)=0,\quad 0<x<L,\quad t>0\\v_{x}(0,t)=0,\quad v(L,t)=0,\quad t>0\\v(x,0)=\frac{C}{2\alpha}(x^2-L^2),\quad 0<x<L\end{array}\right.$

I use separation of variables: $v(x,t)=X(x)T(t)$. The first equation becomes $XT'=\alpha X''T\implies \alpha \frac{X''}{X}=\frac{T'}{T}=-\lambda$, where $\lambda$ is a separation constant. This results in the system

$\left\{\begin{array}{ll}\alpha X''+\lambda X=0\\T'+\lambda T=0\\\end{array}\right.$

We know that for $\lambda \leq 0$ only trivial solutions are obtained, so we set $0<\lambda$. The ODEs yield the following solutions:

$\left\{\begin{array}{ll}X(x)=A \cos(\sqrt{\lambda /\alpha }x)+B\sin(\sqrt{\lambda / \alpha}x)\\T(t)=De^{-\lambda t}\\\end{array}\right.$

Now, when I apply the BCs I get $A=0$ and if $B\neq 0$ then $\lambda =\frac{\alpha}{L^2}(\pi /2 +\pi n)$, where $n$ is a non-negative integer.

Is that correct? Do I just multiply $X$ and $T$ and sum up all these solutions for different $n$ using linearity and that is my (general) solution? It looks odd to me.

Best regards //

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ you still have to figure out the formula of the coefficients $a_n$ in $v = \sum_{n\geq 1} a_n \sin(\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{L^2}(\pi /2 +\pi n) / \alpha}x)e^{-{\frac{\alpha t}{L^2}(\pi /2 +\pi n)}}$ for that use the BC's and/or IC's $\endgroup$ – rapidracim Jan 30 at 20:47
2
$\begingroup$

The eigenvalues look "odd" because you have mixed boundary conditions (Neumann on one side, Dirichlet on the other).

Note that the B.C. $X'(0) = 0$ forces $\color{red}{B=0}$, so the eigenfunctions have the form

$$ X_n(x) = \cos\left(\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{2L}x\right) $$

where $n = 0,1,2,\dots$ and $\lambda_n = \dfrac{\alpha\pi^2}{4L^2}(2n+1)^2$

The rest is business as usual. Write the general solution as a series and use the I.C. $u(x,0)$ to find the constants.

Edit: The solution is

$$ v(x,t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n e^{-\frac{\alpha \pi^2}{4L^2}(2n+1)^2t}\cos\left(\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{2L}x\right) $$

where

$$ c_n = \frac{\int_0^L f(x)\cos\left(\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{2L}x\right) dx}{\int_0^L \cos^2\left(\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{2L}x\right)dx } $$

and $f(x) = v(x,0)$

Edit 2: This result was derived from the orthogonality of the eigenfunctions. For $n\ne m$ you always have

$$ \int_0^L X_n(x)X_m(x)\ dx = 0 $$

To find $c_n$ such that

$$ \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n X_n(x) = f(x) $$

Multiply both sides by $X_m(x)$ and integrate throughout

$$ \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n\int_0^L X_n(x)X_m(x)\ dx = \int_0^L f(x)X_m(x)\ dx $$

Every term on the LHS will go to $0$ except for when $n=m$, therefore

$$ c_m \int_0^L [X_m(x)]^2\ dx = \int_0^L f(x) X_m(x)\ dx $$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I didn't realize I had mixed boundary conditions. But when using the I.C. v(x,0) I obtain a series of cosines equal to a power of x and a constant. Is it possible to choose the coefficients such that these are equal? Or have I made a mistake somewhere. $\endgroup$ – SimpleProgrammer Jan 31 at 9:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You have to find the corresponding Fourier series of the initial function. $\endgroup$ – Dylan Jan 31 at 10:02
  • $\begingroup$ I've been trying to get the same coefficients as you, but using Fourier series expansion for the initial function on the interval 0<x<L becomes something hideous. Are you using "Fourier's trick" or how did you obtain c_n in such a compact way? (Maybe this ought to be an entirely new question...) $\endgroup$ – SimpleProgrammer Jan 31 at 11:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's a result of orthogonality, i.e. $\int_0^L X_nX_m dx =0$ for $n\ne m$ $\endgroup$ – Dylan Jan 31 at 11:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, I did mean $v$. Thanks $\endgroup$ – Dylan Jan 31 at 16:29

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.