I don't agree with the solution manual of a mixed poisson problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on solving a mixed Poisson problem defined on a disk, specifically addressing the equation \(\nabla^2 U = r \sin \theta\) for \(0 < r < \frac{1}{2}\) and \(\nabla^2 U = 0\) for \(\frac{1}{2} < r < 1\) with the boundary condition \(U(1,\theta) = 0\). The solution manual proposes a series solution involving Bessel functions and Fourier series expansion. The main contention arises from the treatment of the problem as a Poisson problem only in the region \(0 < r < \frac{1}{2}\) while neglecting the Laplace equation for \(r > \frac{1}{2}\), leading to questions about the completeness of the solution and the justification for ignoring the outer region.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mixed boundary value problems in partial differential equations.
  • Familiarity with Bessel functions, specifically \(J_m\) functions.
  • Knowledge of Fourier series and their application in solving differential equations.
  • Concept of Laplace's equation and its relation to Poisson's equation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and properties of Bessel functions, particularly \(J_m\) functions.
  • Learn about mixed boundary value problems in the context of partial differential equations.
  • Explore the application of Fourier series in solving Laplace's equation.
  • Investigate the mathematical justification for treating regions differently in mixed boundary problems.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineering students focusing on applied mathematics, particularly those dealing with partial differential equations and boundary value problems.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291

Homework Statement



Solve mixed poisson's problem on disk given

\nabla^2 U= r sin \theta \hbox{ for } 0 &lt;r&lt; \frac{1}{2}

\nabla^2 U= 0 \hbox{ for } \frac{1}{2} &lt; r &lt; 1

With given boundary condition U(1,\theta)=0


2. Answer from the solution manual

U(r,\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\phi_{mn}(r,\theta)

\phi_{mn}(r,\theta)= J_m(\lambda_{mn}r)[A_{mn}cos (m\theta) + B_{mn}sin (m \theta)]

Helmholtz \Rightarrow \nabla^2 \phi_{mn}(r,\theta)= -\lambda_{mn}\phi_{mn}(r,\theta)

\nabla^2 \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\phi_{mn}(r,\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}-\lambda_{mn}J_m(\lambda_{mn}r)[A_{mn}cos (m\theta) + B_{mn}sin (m\theta)] = r sin(\theta)

Using Fourier series expansion:

\Rightarrow \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} -\alpha^2_{1n} B_{1n} sin(\theta) J_1(\alpha_{1n}) = r sin(\theta)

\Rightarrow -sin(\theta) \int_0^{\frac{1}{2}} \alpha^2_{1n} B_{1n} J^2_{1n}(\alpha_{1n}r)rdr = \int_0^{\frac{1}{2}}sin(\theta) r^2 J_1(\alpha_{1n}r)dr

-\alpha^2_{1n} B_{1n} = \frac{J_2(\frac{\alpha_{1n}}{2}}{2\alpha_{1n}J^2_2(\alpha_{1n})}

3. My questions:


Why is this treated as only a poisson problem only for 0<r<1/2 and ignor 1/2<r<1.

I thought this is a two parts problem where it is a poisson problem for 0<r<1/2 and Laplace problem for 1/2<r<1.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone please?

I know this is very similar to Fourier series expansion like:

f(x) = h(x) for 0<x<1
f(x) = 0 for 1<x<2

0<x<2

Where the Fourier series expansion only integrate from x=0 to x=1 only and totally ignor the portion of x=1 to x=2.

I never see the prove, this only show up in the work problems. Can anyone show me the prove of this.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
4K