Finite element solving of Laplace's equation doesn't converge

crum
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm trying to solve Laplace's equation numerically in 3d for a charged sphere in a big box. I'm using Comsol, which solves using the finite elements method. I used neumann BC on the surface of the sphere, and flux=0 BC on the box in which I have the sphere. The result does not converge.

Homework Equations


Laplace's equation \[\nabla^2 \phi=0\]

The Attempt at a Solution


I've tried using derichlet BC instead of neumann, and a fixed potential at the box (instead of flux=0), but the result still doesn't converge. Convergance errors usually appears when the mesh is not fine enough or I'm missing a boundary condition, but I don't see how using neumann at the surface and flux=0 at the box wouldn't be enough boundary conditions. I have used the same BCs using the Poisson-Boltzman eq and it worked fine there.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it being solved iteratively?
 
Chestermiller said:
Is it being solved iteratively?
Yes, that's how COMSOL works.

@crum: can you give more details about how you are setting up the problem in COMSOL?
 
DrClaude said:
Yes, that's how COMSOL works.

@crum: can you give more details about how you are setting up the problem in COMSOL?
I make a small sphere inside of a big simulation box (100times the size of the sphere). I set the laplace to hold inside of the simulation box and inside the sphere. I set neumann conditions on the surface of the sphere, and flux=0 BC on the edge of the box. I don't know what other info i could give you.

I tried making a small-scale 1d model and it still didn't work, so I'm guessing it has to do with some more basic error. I set Laplace's equation to hold on an interval, with neumann BC on one side of the interval, and flux=0 BC on the other side. The result still didn't converge.
 
crum said:
I set neumann conditions on the surface of the sphere, and flux=0 BC on the edge of the box. I don't know what other info i could give you.
When you say you set Neumann conditions on the surface of the sphere, are you implying that you have non-homogenous Neumann conditions? If so, this would imply a non-zero flux into (or out of) your volume and no sources inside the volume. Thus, your boundary conditions would be incompatible with your differential equation.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top