Solving PDEs using Fouries Series ?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Makveger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pdes Series
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the 2D Laplace's equation using Fourier series, specifically addressing boundary conditions in a square domain. Participants explore the mathematical formulation, boundary conditions, and the conversion of solutions into series forms.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a solution form for Laplace's equation using Fourier series but expresses uncertainty about converting it into a series based on the boundary conditions.
  • Another participant questions the boundary conditions at specific points, seeking clarification on their implications for the solution.
  • Some participants suggest that both sinusoidal and hyperbolic functions may be necessary to satisfy the boundary conditions, while others propose that ignoring certain points may simplify the problem.
  • A later reply emphasizes the importance of correctly applying boundary conditions to derive the series solution and suggests using half-range sine expansions to find constants.
  • There are discussions about the Fourier transform of a specific function, with participants sharing links and noting conventions used in different contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of boundary conditions, particularly at the points (0, L) and (L, L). There is no consensus on whether these points can be ignored or if they necessitate a more complex solution. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to convert the solution into a series.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity on boundary conditions and their effects on the solution, indicating that assumptions about ignoring certain points may lead to complications in fulfilling all boundary conditions.

Makveger
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Solving PDEs using Fouries Series ?

Hello
I am trying to solve 2D Laplace's equation (\nabla2u) using Fourier series using these boundary conditions for a square domain of length L:
u(x, 0) = 0
u(0, y) = 0
u(L, y) = 0
u(x,L) = Uo

After solving the 2 ODEs(separating variables method) the solution is in this form (using the boundary conditions except the last one):
u(x,y) = E*Sin(nπx/L)*Sinh(nπy/L)

And I'm stuck here,after using the 4th boundary conditions to convert the above function into a series
How can I convert this formula into a series??
How can the solution be the sum of all the values of u for all the values of n(Where n =1,2,3,...) ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org


u(0, y) = 0 and u(x,L) = Uo
Then, can you clearly state u(0,L)= ?

u(L, y) = 0 and u(x,L) = Uo
Then, can you clearly state u(L,L)= ?
 


I think the sinuous functions in x direction are the basis you choose. However, for the y direction, it must be both sinuous and co-sinuous functions. When you get the matrix representation in y direction, I think we need to impost the boundary condition on both sides. The simple way would be change the first row and the last row by the boundary condition in the so called physical space.
 


Roughly I agree with the proposal of Kuan. But I am afraid that it will be not so simple.
In fact, around the points of (0 , L) and (L , L), a special beaviour occurs. That is why I asked Makvenger to clarify the bounding conditions on these particular points. Up to now, Makvenger gave no answer. So I think that it would be premature to go further in the mathematical development.
Without more relevant information, the solution have to include not only sinusoidal fuctions, but also Heaviside functions.
 


JJacquelin, I see what you mean! For me, I simply ignored these 2 points at (0 , L) and (L , L). No matter what conditions they are, the Fourier series is going to diverge pointwisely at at (0 , L) and (L , L).
 


OK. Kuan, that's right.
But, is it allowed to ignore what appened close to whese points ?
If this is of no importance regarding to the physical problem, OK, the solution expessed only in terms of sinusoidal functions will be sufficient.
If not, the solution has to be more complicated, in order to completely fulfill the boundary conditions.
So, the answer of Makveger is a key point.
 


Yes, JJacquelin. You are right, I totally agree with you!
 


lapace or separation of variables works here.. either way is good.
 
Hey can somebody tell me the Fourier transform of e^-(pi*t^2)?
 
  • #11
Thanks for your help. But can you please help me out with the mathematics. I have tried it but got struck in the integral.
 
  • #12
Makveger said:
Hello
I am trying to solve 2D Laplace's equation (\nabla2u) using Fourier series using these boundary conditions for a square domain of length L:
u(x, 0) = 0
u(0, y) = 0
u(L, y) = 0
u(x,L) = Uo

After solving the 2 ODEs(separating variables method) the solution is in this form (using the boundary conditions except the last one):
u(x,y) = E*Sin(nπx/L)*Sinh(nπy/L)

And I'm stuck here,after using the 4th boundary conditions to convert the above function into a series
How can I convert this formula into a series??
How can the solution be the sum of all the values of u for all the values of n(Where n =1,2,3,...) ??

You haven't written your ##u(x,y)## correctly. You have ##X_n(x)=\sin\frac{n\pi x}{L}## and ##Y_n(y) =\sinh\frac {n\pi y}{L}##. So your prospective solution is$$
u(x,y) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty c_nX_n(x)Y_n(y) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty c_n\sin\frac{n\pi x}{L}
\sinh\frac {n\pi y}{L}$$Now apply your fourth BC ##u(x,L)=U_0##:$$
U_0 =\sum_{n=1}^\infty c_n\sin\frac{n\pi x}{L}
\sinh\frac {n\pi L}{L}$$Now use your half range sine expansion to get the constants. Notice that what you usually call ##a_n## in a sine expansion is ##a_n = c_n\sinh(n\pi)## in this problem.
 
  • #13
JJacquelin said:

For anyone using wolframalpha or mathematica to compute Fourier transforms, be aware that the default convention is to use the unitary-transformation convention: factors of ##1/\sqrt{2\pi}## outside both the transform and the inverse. Typically in physics the factors are 1 in front of the transform and ##1/2\pi## in front of the inverse.

(Overall the difference doesn't matter as long as you use a consistent convention, or unless you want to compare to a particular solution which uses a particular convention).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K