Solution of unsteady linearized potential flow PDE

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MarkoA
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flow Pde Potential
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the solution of a linearized potential flow equation as presented in a publication by Fung, specifically addressing potential flow over an oscillating plate. Participants explore the mathematical formulation and solution techniques related to the governing equations, including boundary layer approximations and wave conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks assistance in understanding the derivation of solutions (12) and (13) from the equations of motion and wave conditions presented in Fung's paper.
  • Another participant suggests substituting the proposed solution into the governing equations to verify its validity, indicating that sometimes a change of variables or trigonometric identity may be involved.
  • A different participant proposes that Duhamel's principle could be relevant for solving the non-homogeneous PDEs related to the wave equation, questioning if this approach could lead to the solution.
  • One participant acknowledges a mistake in their earlier substitution and expresses the need to find the correlation between the potential and a variable z.
  • Another participant reports progress in deriving equations (14) and (15) and questions whether the Fourier constant alpha can be correlated with the wave number.
  • Participants discuss the implications of applying a double Fourier transformation to the governing equations, leading to a specific form that relates the parameters involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints and approaches to the problem, with no consensus reached on the best method for deriving the solutions. Multiple competing ideas and techniques are presented, indicating an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully established the relationships between certain variables, such as the correlation between the Fourier constant alpha and the wave number, nor have they resolved the implications of their substitutions and transformations.

MarkoA
Messages
12
Reaction score
1
Hi,

I have a problem following the solution of a linearized potential flow equation in a publication by Fung.

The problem describes potential flow over an oscillating plate. A boundary layer is approximated by defining a subsonic layer over the panel and supersonic flow above the subsonic flow. From the equation of motion (1) and (2) in combination with a standing wave condition of the wall (8) and traveling wave of the perturbations (9) and (10) it seems to be easy to get the solutions (12) and (13).

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20358584/fung1.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20358584/fung2.png

Can anyobody give me hint of how to get to this solution? The paper is the following:
[PLAIN]http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/3.1661[/PLAIN]
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/3.1661

Many thanks in advance!

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20358584/fung3.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
When I am confronted with "it's easy to see that..." I usually first try substituting the answer into the expression and seeing what happens- sometimes there's an oddball change of variables or trig identity involved.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MarkoA
I don't know. This doesn't help. What could he have done? I've heard that Duhamel's principle could be an approach of solving non-homogenious PDEs like the wave equation. Could the solution have something to do with this approach?

Substituting (13) in (2) gives:
\begin{equation} [-\frac{1}{a_{\delta}^2} \omega^2 - \frac{2M_{\delta}}{a_{\delta}} \alpha_{\nu}\omega + \beta_{\delta}^2\alpha_{\nu}^2 + \zeta_{\delta}^2] \cdot e^{i(\omega t + \alpha_{\nu} x)} \cdot [C_{\nu} sin(\zeta_{\nu}y ) + D_{\nu} cos(\zeta_{\nu}y) ] = 0 \end{equation}
 
Last edited:
Oh... the substitution was absolutely wrong. I need to find the correlation between the potential and z..
 
I made some progress to get equation (14) and (15). Not sure if I can already corellate the fourer constant alpha with the wave number.

<br /> The equation of motion:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \frac{1}{a^2}\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial t^2} + \frac{2M}{a} \frac{\partial^2 \phi}{\partial x \partial t} + \overline{\beta}^2 \frac{\partial^2 \phi}{\partial x^2} = \frac{\partial^2 \phi}{\partial y^2}<br /> \label{eq:01}<br /> \end{equation}<br /> The potential must oscillate harmonically:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \phi = \Psi(x,y)e^{i\omega t}<br /> \label{eq:02}<br /> \end{equation}<br /> This yields:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \Big(\frac{i\omega}{a}\Big)^2\Psi + 2i\frac{\omega M}{a} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} + \overline{\beta}^2 \frac{\partial^2 \Psi}{\partial x^2} = \frac{\partial^2 \Psi}{\partial y^2}<br /> \label{eq:03}<br /> \end{equation}<br /> A double Fourier transformation in x and y:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \Psi^* = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i(\gamma y + \alpha x)} \Psi(x,y) dx dy<br /> \label{eq:04}<br /> \end{equation}<br /> If this Fourier transformation is applied to all terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:03}) then $\Phi^*$ cancels out and (\ref{eq:03}) can be written as:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \frac{\omega^2}{a^2} + 2 \frac{\omega M}{a} \alpha + \overline{\beta}^2 \alpha^2 = \gamma^2<br /> \end{equation}<br /> This is equation (14) in the publication from Fung. The same approach for Fungs equation (2) yields (15). Can I already assume that $\gamma$ is $\gamma_{\nu}$ and $\alpha$ is $\alpha_{\nu}$?<br />
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K