Solving the 1D Heat Equation with Separations of Variables

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter superbread88
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    1d Heat Heat equation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the one-dimensional heat equation using the method of separation of variables. Participants explore the equation given by \(\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=4\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}\) with specific boundary and initial conditions. The focus is on deriving a solution for the temperature \(u(x,t)\) under these constraints.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in solving the heat equation and seeks assistance.
  • Another participant proposes a solution using separation of variables, leading to a pair of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) for \(\alpha(x)\) and \(\beta(t)\).
  • It is noted that the boundary conditions provided may not be coherent with the initial condition, particularly at \(x=0\).
  • A later reply suggests that the initial condition can be redefined to allow for a Fourier series representation, leading to a different form of the solution.
  • Confusion arises when a participant mentions their professor's claim of a different correct answer, which adds to the uncertainty regarding the solution.
  • Another participant points out a potential typo in the initial problem statement regarding the boundary conditions, suggesting that the conditions should involve partial derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct interpretation of the boundary conditions or the resulting solution. There are competing views on the coherence of the initial conditions and the validity of the proposed solutions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the clarity of the problem statement, particularly regarding the boundary conditions. There are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions about the nature of the initial condition that affect the proposed solutions.

superbread88
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Have been trying for hours but simply no results. Hope that someone can help me out.

\[\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=4\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}\]

for \(t>0\) and \(0\leq x\leq 2\) subject to the boundary conditions

\[u_x (0,t) = 0\mbox{ and }u(2,t) = 0\]

and the initial condition

\[u(x,0) = 2 \cos \left(\frac{7\pi x}{4}\right)\]

By the use of separations of variables, solve the above equation for the temperature \(u(x,t)\)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
superbread88 said:
Have been trying for hours but simply no results. Hope that someone can help me out.

∂u/∂t=4(∂^2 u)/(∂x^2 )

for t>0 and 0≤x≤2 subject to the boundary conditions

ux (0,t) = 0 and u(2,t) = 0

and the initial condition

u(x,0) = 2 cos (7πx)/4

By the use of separations of variables, solve the above equation for the temperature u(x,t)



Let suppose that any solution can be written as $\displaystyle u(x,t)= \alpha(x)\ \beta(t)$, so that the PDE is written as... $\displaystyle \frac{\alpha^{\ ''}}{\alpha} = \frac{\beta^{\ '}}{4\ \beta}=c$ (1)

... where c is a constant that we suppose to be negative so that we set $\displaystyle c=- \frac{1}{\lambda^{2}}$, $u_{t}= \alpha\ \beta^{\ '}$ and $u_{xx}= \beta\ \alpha^{\ ''}$ and arrive to the pair of ODE...

$\displaystyle \alpha^{\ ''}= - \frac{\alpha}{\lambda^{2}}$ (2)

$\displaystyle \beta^{\ '}= - \frac{4\ \beta}{\lambda^{2}}$ (3)

The (3) has solution...

$\beta = A\ e^{- \frac{4\ t}{\lambda^{2}}}$ (4)

... and (2) has solution...

$\alpha = B\ \cos (\frac{x}{\lambda}) + C\ \sin (\frac{x}{\lambda})$ (5)

Now we to introduce the 'conditions on the contour' that are...

$\displaystyle u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0\ ,\ u(x,0)= 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)$ (6)

It is easy to see that the (6) are not coherent because for x=0 is u=0 no matter which is t, so that we take into account only the conditions $\displaystyle u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0$. In this case the value of $\lambda$ is $\displaystyle \lambda= \frac{2}{n\ \pi}$ and the solution becomes...

$\displaystyle u(x,t)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_{n} \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ e^{- n^{2}\ \pi^{2}\ t}$ (7)

http://www.sv-luka.org/ikone/ikone180a.jpg

Marry Christmas from Serbia

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
Last edited:
chisigma said:
Let suppose that any solution can be written as $\displaystyle u(x,t)= \alpha(x)\ \beta(t)$, so that the PDE is written as... $\displaystyle \frac{\alpha^{\ ''}}{\alpha} = \frac{\beta^{\ '}}{4\ \beta}=c$ (1)

... where c is a constant that we suppose to be negative so that we set $\displaystyle c=- \frac{1}{\lambda^{2}}$, $u_{t}= \alpha\ \beta^{\ '}$ and $u_{xx}= \beta\ \alpha^{\ ''}$ and arrive to the pair of ODE...

$\displaystyle \alpha^{\ ''}= - \frac{\alpha}{\lambda^{2}}$ (2)

$\displaystyle \beta^{\ '}= - \frac{4\ \beta}{\lambda^{2}}$ (3)

The (3) has solution...

$\beta = A\ e^{- \frac{4\ t}{\lambda^{2}}}$ (4)

... and (2) has solution...

$\alpha = B\ \cos (\frac{x}{\lambda}) + C\ \sin (\frac{x}{\lambda})$ (5)

Now we to introduce the 'conditions on the contour' that are...

$\displaystyle u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0\ ,\ u(x,0)= 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)$ (6)

It is easy to see that the (6) are not coherent because for x=0 is u=0 no matter which is t, so that we take into account only the conditions $\displaystyle u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0$. In this case the value of $\lambda$ is $\displaystyle \lambda= \frac{2}{n\ \pi}$ and the solution becomes...

$\displaystyle u(x,t)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_{n} \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ e^{- n^{2}\ \pi^{2}\ t}$ (7)

The conditions on contour have been defined as 'non coherent' because the term $2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)$ for $x=0$ is $\ne 0$, but that isn't true if we set the last condition as...

$\displaystyle u(x,0)= g(x)= \begin{cases} 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x), & \text{if } 0< x <2\\
- 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x), & \text{if } -2 < x < 0\\ 0, & \text{if}\ x=-2,x=0, x=2\end{cases}$ (1)

Now g(x) can be written as a Fourier series on only sines with coefficients ...

$\displaystyle c_{n}= 2\ \int_{0}^{2} \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)\ \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ dx = \frac{16\ n}{4\ \pi\ n^{2} -49\ \pi}$ (2)

... so that the solution is...

$\displaystyle u(x,t) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{16\ n}{4\ \pi\ n^{2} -49\ \pi} \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ e^{- n^{2}\ \pi^{2}\ t}$ (3)

http://www.sv-luka.org/ikone/ikone180a.jpg

Marry Christmas from Serbia

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
The conditions on contour have been defined as 'non coherent' because the term $2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)$ for $x=0$ is $\ne 0$, but that isn't true if we set the last condition as...

$\displaystyle u(x,0)= g(x)= \begin{cases} 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x), & \text{if } 0< x <2\\
- 2\ \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x), & \text{if } -2 < x < 0\\ 0, & \text{if}\ x=-2,x=0, x=2\end{cases}$ (1)

Now g(x) can be written as a Fourier series on only sines with coefficients ...

$\displaystyle c_{n}= 2\ \int_{0}^{2} \cos (\frac{7}{4}\ \pi\ x)\ \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ dx = \frac{16\ n}{4\ \pi\ n^{2} -49\ \pi}$ (2)

... so that the solution is...

$\displaystyle u(x,t) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{16\ n}{4\ \pi\ n^{2} -49\ \pi} \sin (\frac{\pi}{2}\ n\ x)\ e^{- n^{2}\ \pi^{2}\ t}$ (3)

http://www.sv-luka.org/ikone/ikone180a.jpg

Marry Christmas from Serbia

$\chi$ $\sigma$

Thank you very much for your help Chisigma. I e-mail my professor with regards to this question and she only replied me her answer which is :

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/514._xfImport

I understood your working but my professor claim that the above is the correct answer and now I am really confused.

Sorry I tried my best to type this out using LaTeX but I simply don't know how to thus I insert a picture for illustration purpose.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    4 KB · Views: 84
superbread88 said:
Thank you very much for your help Chisigma. I e-mail my professor with regards to this question and she only replied me her answer which is :

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/514

I understood your working but my professor claim that the above is the correct answer and now I am really confused.

Sorry I tried my best to type this out using LaTeX but I simply don't know how to thus I insert a picture for illustration purpose.
I think that you have a typo in the initial statement of the problem. You wrote

superbread88 said:
\[\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=4\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}\]

for \(t>0\) and \(0\leq x\leq 2\) subject to the boundary conditions

\[\color{red}{u_x (0,t) = 0}\mbox{ and }\color{red}{u(2,t) = 0}\]

and the initial condition

\[u(x,0) = 2 \cos \left(\frac{7\pi x}{4}\right)\]

with the boundary conditions given as $u_x (0,t) = 0$ and $u(2,t) = 0$. Chisigma interpreted this as $u (0,t) = 0$ and $u(2,t) = 0$ (with no partial derivative in either condition). It looks as though you should have written $u_x (0,t) = 0$ and $u_x(2,t) = 0$ (with a partial derivative in both conditions). Chisigma's solution can then quite easily be modified to give the professor's solution.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K