Finding Solutions for Laplace's Equation with Radial Dependence

  • Thread starter Thread starter mcfc
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on solving Laplace's equation with radial dependence, specifically the equation ∇²T = 0 under boundary conditions T(a) = T1 and T(b) = T2. Participants clarify the correct form of the polar Laplacian and emphasize the importance of applying boundary conditions properly. One contributor presents a solution attempt involving constants A and B, but acknowledges confusion regarding the integration process and boundary conditions. The conversation highlights the distinction between two forms of the polar Laplacian and confirms their equivalence when considering angular independence. Proper understanding of the Laplacian and boundary conditions is crucial for solving the problem effectively.
mcfc
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I need to solve:
\nabla ^2 T = 0 with T=T(r) and r=a/T=T1 and r=b/T=T2

Can anyone offer advice as to the solution?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I don't quite understand what you mean with your boundry conditions, do you mean...

when r=a, T=T1
when r=b, T=T2

Is this what you mean?
 


flatmaster said:
I don't quite understand what you mean with your boundry conditions, do you mean...

when r=a, T=T1
when r=b, T=T2

Is this what you mean?

Hi,

Yes, sorry for the confusion
 


Where is your attempt at a solution? You need to crack open a textbook and flip to the section called "Laplace's equation".
 


Phyisab**** said:
Where is your attempt at a solution? You need to crack open a textbook and flip to the section called "Laplace's equation".
My result is :
T= \frac{1}{2} Ar + \frac{B}{ r}
A, B constants. Also in this example, I'm not sure how to apply the boundary conditions...
But the result I saw(without proof) involved logarithms...?
 


Well that's not the right solution. It's a pretty simple problem. Either you started with the wrong formula for the Laplacian in polar coordinates, or you integrated it wrong. You apply the boundary conditions the same way you would in any other situation.
 


\nabla ^2 T = \frac {\partial}{\partial r}( {1 \over r}\frac{\partial rT}{\partial r})=0
is the polar form used,

which implies {1 \over r}\frac{\partial rT}{\partial r}= A and integrate to get my (incorrect) result above...
What am I missing!?
 


Ah you just wrote the polar Laplacian wrong. It should be r(dT/dr)=A at your last step. :cool:
 


\frac{\partial T}{\partial r} = \frac{A}{r}

T(a)= Aln(a) + B = T_{1}
T(b)= Aln(b) + B = T_{2}
 
Last edited:
  • #10


Thanks.

I've been confused because I've seen two forms of the polar laplacian:
1)\frac {\partial}{\partial r}( {1 \over r}\frac{\partial T r}{\partial r})

and

2){1 \over r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r \frac{\partial T}{\partial r})

how are these equivalent?
 
  • #11


\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left(r\frac{\partial T}{\partial r}\right)=0

the factor of \frac{1}{r} comes from the laplacian with theta dependence. Here you are independent of angle. Just multiply by r and it is gone.
 

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K