Solution of the 1D heat equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the solution of the one-dimensional heat equation with specific initial and boundary conditions. Participants are analyzing the derivation of the solution presented in a published paper, focusing on the implications of the boundary conditions and the correctness of the proposed solution.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the heat equation and the associated boundary conditions, expressing uncertainty about the correctness of the derived solution from a paper.
  • Another participant points out that the proposed solution does not satisfy the boundary condition at x=L.
  • Concerns are raised about the credibility of the published solution, despite it being from a renowned professor, with a request for the paper's link for verification.
  • A link to the paper is provided, along with a note that the boundary condition is said to be "reasonably well satisfied" under certain conditions, specifically when A approaches 0.
  • One participant suggests that the authors of the article assume the oscillatory part of the solution dampens out before reaching x=L, introducing a condition for this assumption.
  • Another participant corrects an earlier equation, indicating that the form of the solution should include additional factors and terms, and questions the accuracy of the original analysis.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the roots of a specific equation, which relates to the correct form of the solution.
  • One participant derives expressions for a(x) and b(x) based on the corrected form of the equation, applying boundary conditions to determine constants.
  • There is a correction regarding the sign of a term in the equation, emphasizing the need for careful mathematical handling.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of the proposed solution, particularly in relation to the boundary conditions. Multiple competing views remain about the assumptions made in the published paper and the correctness of the derived equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the solution's validity may depend on specific experimental parameters and assumptions about damping effects, which are not fully resolved in the discussion.

Betsy
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
$$\frac{\partial T}{\partial t}=\alpha\frac{\partial^2 T}{\partial^2 t}$$

with an initial condition and boundary conditions
$$T(x,0)=T_0$$
$$T(L,t)=T_0$$
$$-k\left.\frac{\partial T}{\partial x}\right|_{x=0}=2A\cos^2\left(\frac{\omega t}{2}\right)=A(\cos\omega t+1)$$

where $A=V_0^2/(8RhL)$, $V_0$ is the voltage applied to the heater, R the electrical resistance of the heater, h the thickness of the thin film, $\alpha$ the thermal diffusivity of the thin film, and $\omega/2$ the heating frequency. The solution for this problem is

$$T(x,t)-T_0=\frac Ak\sqrt{\frac\alpha\omega}\exp\left (-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)\\ \times\cos\left(\omega t-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x-\frac\pi4\right)-\frac Ak(x-L)$$I got this from a paper. I'm trying to derive how the author came to the solution from the boundary conditions. There is no derivation in the paper, and I searched books and the internet thoroughly but couldn't find anything. I attached the solution I'm getting. But I don't think it's correct! Any help regarding where I'm doing wrong will be greatly appreciated.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
That solution does not satisfy the boundary condition at x=L.
 
Orodruin said:
That solution does not satisfy the boundary condition at x=L.
But it was published in a good journal by a very renowned professor (now). They must have some logic behind it which is unfortunately not mentioned in the paper.
 
Betsy said:
But it was published in a good journal by a very renowned professor (now).
Can you provide a link to the paper in the journal? Your PDF attachment does not include the beginning of the paper with that information. Thanks. :smile:
 
Betsy said:
From the sentence below the solution, it is said that the B.C. is reasonably well satisfied because A approaches 0 for the experimental parameters chosen.
And indeed if A equals 0, you do get the B.C. satisfied.
 
Like I told you in the other forum that you and I have been interacting in, the authors of this article implicitly assume that the oscillatory part of the solution damps out before it reaches x = L. The condition for this to happen is ##\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}L>>0##.

In your analysis, Eqn. 17 is incorrect. It should read (based on the above assumption), $$a(x)=C_1\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\cos{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}+C_2\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\sin{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}$$
You are missing factors of 2 in the denominators of the square root terms in your expression.

To obtain b(x), you substitute this corrected form of Eqn. 17 into your Eqn. 14. What do you obtain?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU
Maybe it would help also if I told you that the four roots of of ##x^4=-1## are
$$x=\frac{1+i}{\sqrt{2}}$$
$$x=\frac{-1+i}{\sqrt{2}}$$
$$x=\frac{-1-i}{\sqrt{2}}$$
and $$x=\frac{1-i}{\sqrt{2}}$$
This is where the ##\sqrt{2}## comes from in the correct form of Eqn. 17.
 
In a previous post, I indicated that the solution for a(x) is $$a(x)=C_1\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\cos{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}+C_2\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\sin{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}$$
If I substitute this into your Eqn. 14, I obtain: $$b(x)=C_1\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\sin{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}-C_2\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\cos{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}$$But, applying the boundary condition on b(x) at x = 0, we have that ##C_2=0##. This means that $$a(x)=C_1\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\cos{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}$$ and $$b(x)=C_1\exp{\left(-\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}\sin{\left(\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{2\alpha}}x\right)}$$
In your Eqn. 11, you have the wrong sign on A/k. You got to do the math correctly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K