Paritial Differential Equation separation of variables

In summary: Sorry for the delay. I was trying to solve this on my own and got stuck. Eventually, I was able to get it working but just wanted to double check.
  • #1
KitusFanaticus
8
0

Homework Statement


The temp. as a function of time of a metal rod obeys the following diff. eq.

[tex] \alpha^2 \frac{\partial^2u(x,t)}{\partial x^2} = \frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t} [/tex]

Use separation of variables to find [tex] u(x,t) [/tex] in a rod of length 1 subject to the conditions [tex] u(0,t) = 0 , u(1,t) = 0 [/tex] and [tex] u(x,0) = 10 [/tex]

Homework Equations


Seperation of variable I assume a solution of X(x)T(t) right?

I think the length of the rod is not needed?

The Attempt at a Solution


Assume [tex] u(x,t) = X(x)T(t) [/tex]

Then I get [tex] \frac{\alpha^2}{X(x)}\frac{\partial^2 X(x)}{\partial x^2}= \frac{1}{T(t)}\frac{\partialT(t)}{\partialt} [/tex]

I then set them each equal to an arbitrary constant, -k^2 [tex]\frac{\alpha^2}{X(x)}\frac{\partial^2X(x)}{\parital x^2} = -k^2 [/tex] and [tex] \frac {1}{T(t)}\frac{\partial T(t)}{\partial t} = -k^2 [/tex]

I then solve each of them and get a function [tex] u(x,t) = (e^{-i\frac{k}{\alpha}x} +e^{i\frac{k}{\alpha}x})*(e^{-k^2t}-e^{k^2t}) [/tex]

Now I think that's correct, but I am not positive. I just can't seem to apply the first boundry condition to it...

Help!

PS, I thought this was more useful in the math than physics forum, but move it if necessary, thx

Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
KitusFanaticus said:

Homework Equations


Seperation of variable I assume a solution of X(x)T(t) right?

Yep.

I think the length of the rod is not needed?

Not for the formal separation of variables, no. But of course since they give you the temperature at both ends, it is necessary to know where those ends are. Fortunately, you've been told that.

I then solve each of them and get a function [tex] u(x,t) = (e^{-i\frac{k}{\alpha}x} +e^{i\frac{k}{\alpha}x})*(e^{-k^2t}-e^{k^2t}) [/tex]

I don't agree with this part. The general solution of:

[itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}X(x)=0[/itex]

is:

[itex]X(x)=A\exp(ikx/\alpha)+A^*\exp(-ikx/\alpha)[/itex]

(the two terms should be modulated by constants that are complex conjugates of each other.

And the solution of:

[itex]T^{\prime}(t)+k^2T(t)=0[/itex],

has only one term, the decaying exponential. That second term with the growing exponential shouldn't be there.

I just can't seem to apply the first boundry condition to it...

Try it now.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Thank you for the reply, it was helpful. I am still have much difficulty with this problem though. I have never taken diff. eq. class, the teacher wants us to 'discover' these solutions :rolleyes:
I don't agree with this part. The general solution of:

[itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}=0[/itex]

is:

[itex]X(x)=A\exp(ik^2x/\alpha^2)+A^*\exp(-ik^2x/\alpha^2)[/itex]

(the two terms should be modulated by constants that are complex conjugates of each other.

I don't think [itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}=0[/itex] is what I want to solve is it? I want to solve [itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}\cdotx=0[/itex]. (I think)

And the solution would be [itex]X(x)=A\exp(ikx/\alpha)+A^*\exp(-ikx/\alpha)[/itex] not [itex]X(x)=A\exp(ik^2x/\alpha^2)+A^*\exp(-ik^2x/\alpha^2)[/itex] right?

I don't understand why you take the complex conjugate of the coefficients...

Anyway, I get [tex] u(x,t) = (Aexp(-ikx/\alpha)+Bexp(Ikx/\alpha)(Cexp(-k^2t) [/tex], and I guess B = A*

When I try to apply the initial conditions I get A = -B, and C = 0 ... which leads me to believe I don't quite have the correct solution still...
 
  • #4
KitusFanaticus said:
I don't think [itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}=0[/itex] is what I want to solve is it? I want to solve [itex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}\cdotx=0[/itex]. (I think)

That was a typo on my part. It should read:

[tex]X^{\prime\prime}(x)+\frac{k^2}{\alpha^2}X(x)=0[/tex]

It's fixed now.

And the solution would be [itex]X(x)=A\exp(ikx/\alpha)+A^*\exp(-ikx/\alpha)[/itex] not [itex]X(x)=A\exp(ik^2x/\alpha^2)+A^*\exp(-ik^2x/\alpha^2)[/itex] right?

Yes, that was another typo. Sorry.

I don't understand why you take the complex conjugate of the coefficients...

The constants must be complex conjugates because the overall solution must be real. That means that it must equal its own complex conjugate. The only way for that to happen is for the constants to be [itex]A[/itex] and [itex]A^*[/itex].

Anyway, I get [tex] u(x,t) = (Aexp(-ikx/\alpha)+Bexp(Ikx/\alpha)(Cexp(-k^2t) [/tex], and I guess B = A*

Yes, but there's no need to bother with the [itex]C[/itex]. It is just a real constant that can get absorbed into [itex]A[/itex] and [itex]A^*[/itex] upon distributing.

When I try to apply the initial conditions I get A = -B, and C = 0 ... which leads me to believe I don't quite have the correct solution still...

Hmmm...I'm getting A=B=0. Let me think about it some more.
 
  • #5
KF, I think that this problem is ill-posed. Let me backup and explain why.

Tom Mattson said:
Hmmm...I'm getting A=B=0.

That was a mistake on my part. The general solution of the PDE is, as we discussed,

[itex]u(x,t)=[Aexp(ikx/\alpha)+A^*exp(-ikx/\alpha)]exp(-k^2t)[/itex]

There's nothing wrong with this. Now apply the first boundary condition.

[itex]u(0,t)=[Aexp(0)+A^*exp(0)]exp(-k^2t)=0[/itex],

which implies that [itex]A^*=-A[/itex], which in turn implies that [itex]A[/itex] is purely imaginary. All good so far.

Now let's apply the second boundary condition.

[itex]u(1,t)=[Aexp(ik/\alpha)-Aexp(-ik/\alpha)]exp(-k^2t)=0[/itex]

[itex]A[exp(ik/\alpha)-exp(-ik/\alpha)]exp(-k^2t)=0[/itex]

We have 3 options.

1: [itex]A=0[/itex]

That is, the temperature is zero everywhere and for all time. But looking at the initial condition [itex]u(x,0)=10[/itex], that isn't possible.

2: [itex]exp(-k^2t)=0[/itex]

This has no solution for any value of [itex]t[/itex].

3: [itex]exp(ik/\alpha)-exp(-ik/\alpha)=0[/itex]

You have to use Euler's identities here to simplify this equation to [itex]sin(k/\alpha)=0[/itex]. This leads to (countably) infinitely many values of [itex]k[/itex] which we can refer to as [itex]k_n[/itex], [itex]n\in\mathbb{N}[/itex] (I'll leave the [itex]k_n[/itex] for you to find). Since for a linear PDE the sum of solutions is again a solution, you will have an infinite sum of functions as your solution.

We now turn to the initial condition. It says that the temperature is 10 for all x when t=0. So [itex]u(0,0)=10[/itex] BUT, the first boundary condition says that the temperature is equal to 0 for all t when x=0. So [itex]u(0,0)=0[/itex].

This is a contradiction.
 
  • #6
Are you aware that
[tex]e^{ik/\alpha}= cos(k/\alpha)+ i sin(k/\alpha)[/tex]

It might be simpler to write this in terms of sine and cosine rather that the imaginary exponentials.
 
  • #7
Yes, but what of the apparent contradiction I brought up?
 
  • #8
You'll note on the problem sheet it should read for all 0<x<1, which won't include x=0
 
  • #9
Yes, the initial value is not continuous at x= 0 or x= 1. However, since the solution is an integral which "smooths" the functions, that is not a problem.
 

1. What is the separation of variables method for solving partial differential equations?

The separation of variables method is a technique used to solve partial differential equations (PDEs) by separating the independent variables in the equation and solving each part separately. This method is particularly useful for PDEs with boundary conditions that can be easily separated.

2. How does the separation of variables method work?

The separation of variables method works by assuming that the solution to the PDE can be written as a product of functions of each independent variable. This allows the PDE to be transformed into a series of ordinary differential equations (ODEs), which can then be solved using standard techniques.

3. What types of PDEs can be solved using the separation of variables method?

The separation of variables method is most commonly used to solve linear PDEs with constant coefficients, such as the heat equation, wave equation, and Laplace's equation. However, it can also be applied to some non-linear PDEs and PDEs with variable coefficients.

4. What are the advantages of using the separation of variables method?

The separation of variables method is a powerful and versatile technique for solving PDEs. It allows for the reduction of a PDE to a system of ODEs, which are typically easier to solve. Additionally, it is a systematic and step-by-step approach that can be easily applied to a wide range of PDEs.

5. Are there any limitations to the separation of variables method?

While the separation of variables method is a useful tool for solving PDEs, it has some limitations. It can only be applied to PDEs with certain types of boundary conditions, and it may not always produce a complete solution to the PDE. Additionally, it can be quite time-consuming and cumbersome for more complex PDEs.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
421
Replies
4
Views
632
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
478
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
242
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
898
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
604
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
197
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
822
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
482
Back
Top