PDE-Heat Equation with weird boundary conditions help

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Heat Equation and its associated boundary value problem, specifically focusing on the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions under various conditions. The boundary conditions involve derivatives and function values at the endpoints of a one-dimensional rod.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore different forms of the eigenfunction based on the sign of lambda, questioning the appropriateness of using sine and cosine functions versus sine functions alone. There are attempts to derive relationships between coefficients based on boundary conditions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided alternative approaches and corrections to earlier attempts, while others express confusion regarding the simplification of equations. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of lambda values on the eigenfunctions, with no clear consensus reached on all points.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of boundary conditions and the implications of different values of lambda, including cases where lambda is zero, positive, or negative. The discussion reflects the challenges of deriving non-trivial solutions under these constraints.

tkwan
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider the Heat Equation: du/dt=k(d2u/dx2), where d is a partial and d2 is the second partial. The B.C.'s are u_x(0,t)=u(0,t) and u_x(L,t)=u(L,t), where u_x is the partial of u with respect to x. The I.C is u(x,0)=f(x)

Now, consider the Boundary Value Problem X''(x)=-lambda*X(x), note the negative sign, with B.C's X'(0)=X(0) and X'(L)=X(L), where L is the length of a 1D rod(at the very end of the rod).

Find the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions for lambda>0, lambda=0, and lambda<0

The Attempt at a Solution



lambda=0 was an easy one, lambda=0, gave an eigenfunction X=0.
lambda<0, wasn't too bad either. Since lambda < 0 I get X=Acosh(sqrt(-lambda)*x)+Bsinh(sqrt(-lambda)*x), where A and B are constants. Also, note that lambda is negative, thus the square root will not give any complex numbers. Using the first initial condition X'(0)=X(0), I get that A=sqrt(-lambda)*B and plugging back in again, using the second BC, I get that lambda=-1 and thus the eigenfunction is X=Bcosh(x)+Bsinh(x).

lambda>0 is the one I'm having trouble with. If do what I did for lambda<0, and use X=Acos(sqrt(lambda)*x)+Bsin(sqrt(lambda)*x), I get that lambda is -1, again, however, lambda is suppose to be greater than 0, and the eigenfunction is complex. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For X'' + λX = 0, take the case where λ = μ2> 0, so your equation looks like

X'' + μ2X = 0

Instead of using the pair {sin(μx),cos(μx)} try the pair {sin(μx),sin(μ(L-x))}, so

X(x) = Asin(μx) + Bsin(μ(L-x)).

When you use your two boundary conditions you should get that A = B and you should find a sequence of values μn giving corresponding eigenvalues λn.
 
Thanks for the reply, but should I use the sin(ux), sin(u(L-x))? isn't the solution to this question cos and sin?
 
Sorry, I meant why should I
 
Because it makes the work easier. sin(ux) and sin(u(L-x)) are linearly independent so they work just as well as sin(ux) and cos(ux). Try it.
 
I did try it and I got stuck. If I say X=Asin(ux)+Bsin(u(L-x)) we get X'=Aucos(ux)-Bucos(u(L-x)) and then I get stuck here. I tried both of my BC and couldn't get it to work. If I have X'(0)=X(0), I get Bsin(uL)=Au-Bucos(uL) and I don't know how to simplify that. If I use X'(L)=X(L), I get Asin(uL)=Aucos(uL)-Bu. Again, I can't simplify this.
 
Looking at it again this morning, I see I had an arithmetic error. I think your {sine,cosine} pair works:

X' + u2X = 0
X(0)=X'(0), X(L) = X'(L)

X = A cos(ux) + B sin(ux)
X' = -Au sin(ux) + Bu cos(ux)

X(0)=X'(0) becomes A = Bu and
X(L) = X'(L) becomes Acos(uL) + Bsin(ul) = -Au sin(uL) + Bu cos(uL)

Put A = Bu in the second equation:

Bu cos(uL) + Bsin(ul) + Bu2sin(uL) - Bu cos(uL) = 0
B (1 + u2)sin(uL) = 0

This leads to [itex]u_n = \frac{n\pi}{L}[/itex] with corresponding eigenfunctions.
 
I see what you did. Thanks a lot! I just ended up dividing both sides by B sin(uL) without thinking. Thanks. This leads me to a second question, for the lambda < 0, did I do that one right? I followed similar steps for that one. Thanks again. You're a real life saver.
 
Your original equation was X'' + λX = 0. The case where λ = u2 > 0 gives the sine-cosine eigenfunctions we have looked at.

The case λ = - u2 < 0 gives rise to

X(x) = A cosh(ux) + B sinh(ux)

If you do the same steps as I did on the sine-cosine one I think you will find that only u = 1 giving λ = -1 works with eigenfunction φ1 = cosh(x) + sinh(x).

I also think you need to look again at λ = 0; you should find that you can take φ0 = 1.
 
  • #10
How did you get X0=1? If lambda=0, then X=A+Bx, using X'(0)=X(0), you get A=B and so X=A+Ax, using X'(L)=X(L), you get A=A+A(L), since L>0 A=0 and so X0=0? Am I missing something? Thanks.
 
  • #11
No, you aren't missing anything. I had another glitch. What happens is that λ = 0 is not an eigenvalue because it doesn't lead to a non-trivial solution. φ0(x) ≡ 0 is not an eigenfunction
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K