Solving PDE Heat Equation for Temperature Distribution

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the heat equation for temperature distribution in a rod of length L, subject to specific boundary and initial conditions. The original poster is attempting to find the temperature distribution using a change of variables and separation of variables techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of a change of variables to transform the problem and the implications of boundary conditions. There is a focus on the odd extension of the initial condition function and the application of Fourier series for the solution. Questions arise regarding the correctness of calculations and the physical interpretation of the results.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing insights into the use of Fourier series and half-range expansions. Some express uncertainty about specific calculations and the physical validity of the resulting expressions, while others suggest alternative approaches to the problem setup.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of potential confusion regarding variable substitutions and the interpretation of boundary conditions. Participants are navigating through the complexities of the problem, with some noting discrepancies in the formulation of the equations.

josftx
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the distribution of temperatures in the rod of length L with the follow BC and NC

Homework Equations


u_{t}=\alpha u_{xx}\,\,\,x\in]\frac{-L}{2},\frac{L}{2}
u(\frac{-L}{2},t)=u(\frac{L}{2},t)=700
u(x,0)=300\,\,\,x\in]\frac{-L}{2},\frac{L}{2}


The Attempt at a Solution


With a change of variable v(x,t)=u(L(x-\frac{1}{2}))+700 with the bounday conditions now the new problem its.
v_{t}=\frac{\alpha}{L^{2}}u_{xx}\,\,\,x\in]0,1
v(0,t)=v(1,t)=0
v(x,0)=-400

now, the final solution will be u(x,t)=v(\frax{x}{L}+\frac{1}{2})+700 now my teacher says that i have must find the odd extension of f(x) but i can't resolve. Anyone can't help me for find the Final Solucion with all the changes of variables?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is f(x)? I'm guessing it is v(x,0).

When you use separation of variables on your v(x,t) equation and get to the point where you are evaluating v(x,0), you should have v(x,0) = a Fourier sine series in x. Presumably you will use a half-range expansion for the coefficients, which amounts to using the odd extension of v(x,0).

So proceed with separation of variables.
 
Yes, f(x) means v(x,0). with MSV i find it the general expression for the series.
v(\hat{x},t)={\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_{n}sin(n\pi x)e^{-n^{2}\pi^{2}ct}} with c=\frac{\alpha}{L^{2}} , but the next step i have doubts.

look..

f(x)_{odd}=\begin{cases}<br /> -400 &amp; -1&lt;x\leq0\\<br /> 400\,\ &amp; 0\leqx&lt;1\end{cases}
so..

a_{n}={\displaystyle 2\int_{-1}^{0}-400sin(n\pi x)dx+2\int_{0}^{1}400sin(n\pi x)dx}=\frac{1600}{n\pi}\,\,\,..n=1,3,5...

thats right?
 
You have

v(x,0) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n \sin(n\pi x) = f(x),\ 0 &lt; x &lt; 1

Use the half-range sine expansion formula for the constants:

a_n = 2\int_0^1 f(x) \sin(n\pi x) \,dx = 2\int_0^1 (-400) \sin(n\pi x) \, dx
 
LCKurtz said:
You have

v(x,0) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n \sin(n\pi x) = f(x),\ 0 &lt; x &lt; 1

Use the half-range sine expansion formula for the constants:

a_n = 2\int_0^1 f(x) \sin(n\pi x) \,dx = 2\int_0^1 (-400) \sin(n\pi x) \, dx
so the a_{n}=\frac{-1600}{n\pi}

and the solution its. u(x,t)=-400+\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{-1600}{n\pi} \sin(n\pi \hat{x})e^{n^{2}\pi^{2}ct} + 700

but now i have \hat{x}[\tex] ,,, with \hat{x}=L(x-\frac{1}{2}) <br /> <br /> and the solution of the problem its u(x,t)=v(\frac{x}{L}+\frac{1}{2})+700<br /> <br /> so u(x,t)=300-\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1600}{n\pi} \sin(n\pi (\frac{x}{L}+\frac{1}{2})x)e^{n^{2}\pi^{2}\frac{\alpha}{L^{2}}t}
 
Last edited:
I didn't check your change of variable stuff; I just assumed you have done that correctly. But you might want to check your calculations because a positive exponential in t doesn't make any physical sense.
 
LCKurtz said:
I didn't check your change of variable stuff; I just assumed you have done that correctly. But you might want to check your calculations because a positive exponential in t doesn't make any physical sense.

Sorry its a negative exponential. i might wrong in the transcription to the forum. but i don't know if the solutions its fine, because in any book or something i find a similar exercise with these domain ]-L/2,L/2[ or with the change of variable.
 
josftx said:
Sorry its a negative exponential. i might wrong in the transcription to the forum. but i don't know if the solutions its fine, because in any book or something i find a similar exercise with these domain ]-L/2,L/2[ or with the change of variable.

Since you didn't show the work for the substitution, I couldn't say about that. What I can tell you is that I would have begun with the substitution w(x,t) = u(x + L/2, t) to convert it to a problem on [0,L]. The fact that you did something different doesn't make yours wrong, just different, and as long as you did it correctly there should be no problem.

[Edit] x + L/2, not x + 1/2 as it was.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K