Solving D'alembert Equation for Wave eq. u(4,1) & u(1,4)

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajax2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    D'alembert
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on solving the D'alembert equation for the wave equation defined by utt - uxx = 0, with boundary conditions u(0,t) = t^2, u(x,0) = x^2, and ut(x,0) = 6x. The user attempts to evaluate u(4,1) and u(1,4) using the D'alembert formula, leading to a result of u(4,1) = u(1,4) = 24. However, the evaluation of f(1-4) results in f(-3), which is outside the defined boundary conditions, prompting a discussion on restructuring the equation to accommodate this issue.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave equations and partial differential equations (PDEs)
  • Familiarity with D'alembert's solution for wave equations
  • Knowledge of initial and boundary conditions in mathematical physics
  • Basic calculus, particularly integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study D'alembert's solution for wave equations in detail
  • Learn about boundary value problems in partial differential equations
  • Explore techniques for handling out-of-boundary conditions in PDEs
  • Investigate numerical methods for solving wave equations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, physicists, and engineers working with wave equations and partial differential equations, particularly those dealing with boundary conditions and initial value problems.

ajax2000
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For a wave equation, utt-uxx=0, 0<x< ∞
u(0,t)=t^2, t>0
u(x,0)=x^2, 0<x< ∞
ut(x,0)=6x, 0<x< ∞

evaulate u(4,1) and u(1,4)

uxx is taking 2 derivatives in respective of x




Homework Equations



D'alembert's equation u=(f(x+ct)+f(x-ct))/2 + (1/ct)(∫g(s)ds

The Attempt at a Solution



this seems easy, just plug everything into the formula to get u(4,1)=u(1,4)=24, however,
at u(1,4) when you evaluate f(1-4) that gives you f(-3) which is out of the boundary in the initial condition for x. how do you re-structure another equation so this would work? thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
New territory for me, so what follows may be nonsense, but:

I get u(x,t) = (1/2){(x-t)2 + (x+t)2 + ∫6s ds} with lower limit x-t and upper limit x+t.

So u(1,4) = (1/2){(1-4)2 + (1+4)2 + 48} = whatever.

I guess I don't see where x > 0 is violated anywhere. Of course, x - ct can be negative & is in this instance (c = 1).

Ref: http://www-solar.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~alan/MT2003/PDE/node12.html
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K