Question about a boundary-value problem (electrostatics)

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a boundary-value problem in electrostatics involving a wedge-shaped metallic conductor. The Laplacian in polar coordinates is analyzed, leading to a potential function expressed as a product of radial and angular components. The boundary conditions are applied, revealing challenges in determining constants and achieving a unique solution. It is suggested that additional boundary conditions, particularly regarding the behavior of the potential at infinity and zero, need to be considered to refine the solution. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of revisiting the separation of variables method to explore alternative forms for the radial component.
Sum Guy
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Laplacian for polars:

$$\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left( r\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r}\right) + \frac{1}{r^{2}}\frac{\partial^{2} \phi}{\partial \theta^{2}} = 0$$

This is in relation to a problem relating to a potential determined by the presence of a wedge shaped metallic conductor (see image).
kajx4g.png

Working through the problem:

$$\phi (r,\theta) = R(r)\psi (\theta )$$ with $$R(r) \propto r^{v}$$ and Dirichlet boundary conditions $$\phi (r,0) = \phi (r,\alpha ) = V_{0}$$

Substituting into the Laplacian:
$$\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left( rvr^{v-1}\psi (\theta)\right) + \frac{1}{r^2}r^{v}\psi^{''}(\theta )$$
$$ = r^{v-2}\left( \psi^{''}(\theta ) + v^{2}\psi (\theta )\right) = 0$$
Therefore
$$\psi^{''}(\theta ) + v^{2}\psi (\theta ) = 0$$
Solution is of the form
$$\psi (\theta) = Acos(v\theta ) + Bsin(v\theta )$$
Applying BCs:
$$\phi (r,\theta ) = r^{v}\left(Acos(v\theta ) + Bsin(v\theta )\right)$$
$$\phi (r,0) = V_0 \rightarrow A = V_{0}r^{-v}$$
$$\phi (r,\alpha) = V_0 \rightarrow B = \frac{V_{0}r^{-v}(1-cos(v\alpha ))}{sin(v\alpha )}$$ ...which leaves me with utter crap.

However if we choose V0 such that it is zero then we can reapply the BCs:
$$\phi (r,0) = V_0 \rightarrow A = 0$$
$$\phi (r,\alpha) = V_0 \rightarrow sin(v\alpha ) = 0 \rightarrow v = \frac{n\pi }{\alpha}$$

Resulting in a more pleasant $$\phi(r,\theta ) = Br^{\frac{n\pi }{\alpha}}sin(\frac{n\pi }{\alpha}\theta )$$

So there a few things here that I'm struggling to understand:
If I don't set V0 = 0 then how can I solve the problem?
I should have a unique solution, yet B isn't determined?
How might I correct my solution so that the potential was V0 on the boundaries?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Notice you're short two boundary conditions to solve this problem. Add in ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## everywhere on the region of integration. First, test that condition as r goes to infinity: ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## as ##r \to \infty## implies ##\nu \leq 0##. Second, test the same condition as r goes to zero: ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## as ##r \to 0## implies ##\nu \geq 0##. Meaning, there's only one term in the solution: the 0th order term, simply ##\phi(r,\theta)=A=V_{0}##, ##\nu = 0##. The reason you didn't see it when you performed separation of variables is because ##\nu = 0## makes ##\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\phi(r,\theta) = 0##. If you had handled the zeroth-order term separately, you would've gotten ##\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial\theta^{2}}\psi(\theta) = 0##, which implies ##\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\psi(\theta) = \frac{\psi(\alpha) - \psi(0)}{\alpha}=\frac{V_{0} - V_{0}}{\alpha} = 0##. That tells you that ##\psi(\theta) = \psi(0) = V_{0}##.
 
Twigg said:
Notice you're short two boundary conditions to solve this problem. Add in ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## everywhere on the region of integration. First, test that condition as r goes to infinity: ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## as ##r \to \infty## implies ##\nu \leq 0##. Second, test the same condition as r goes to zero: ##\phi(r,\theta) < \infty## as ##r \to 0## implies ##\nu \geq 0##. Meaning, there's only one term in the solution: the 0th order term, simply ##\phi(r,\theta)=A=V_{0}##, ##\nu = 0##. The reason you didn't see it when you performed separation of variables is because ##\nu = 0## makes ##\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\phi(r,\theta) = 0##. If you had handled the zeroth-order term separately, you would've gotten ##\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial\theta^{2}}\psi(\theta) = 0##, which implies ##\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\psi(\theta) = \frac{\psi(\alpha) - \psi(0)}{\alpha}=\frac{V_{0} - V_{0}}{\alpha} = 0##. That tells you that ##\psi(\theta) = \psi(0) = V_{0}##.
Thank you for your reply.

Wouldn't that lead to the conclusion that ##\phi (r,\theta ) = V_{0}## everywhere? The solution must have some ##r## dependence..? Shouldn't the solution be of the form that I provided when ##V_{0} = 0##?
 
If having the unbounded powers of r weren't an issue, you'd have a superposition of solutions like you got for different values of n, plus the constant ##V_{0}##. There wouldn't be a unique solution because you're still short at least one boundary condition for r at infinity.
 
Sum Guy said:
$$\phi (r,0) = V_0 \rightarrow A = V_{0}r^{-v}$$
##A## is required to be a constant in the process of solving by separation of variables. It cannot be a function of ##r##.

When you write ##R(r) = r^{\nu}##, you are not allowing for all possible forms of ##R(r)##.

I suggest you go back through the process of separation of variables to find the differential equation that ##R(r)## must satisfy and see if you can find a solution that is not of the form ##r^{\nu}##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Sum Guy

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
874
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K