Green's function for 2-D Laplacian within square/rectangular boundary

In summary, the document discusses the derivation and properties of the Green's function for the two-dimensional Laplacian within square or rectangular boundaries. It emphasizes the importance of solving boundary value problems in mathematical physics and engineering, providing a method to construct the Green's function using separation of variables and Fourier series. The resulting Green's function is shown to satisfy the Laplace equation and the specified boundary conditions, facilitating the analysis of potential problems in confined geometries. The implications for applications in electrostatics and heat conduction are also highlighted.
  • #1
Swamp Thing
Insights Author
970
670
From the table of Green functions on Wikipedia we can get the generic 2-D Green's function for the Laplacian operator. But how would one apply boundary conditions like u = 0 along a rectangular boundary? Would we visualize a sort of rectangle-based, tilted pyramid, with logarithmically changing height, with its apex located at our Dirac driving point?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Generally in that case one would look for an eigenfunction expansion, with the eigenfunctions satisfying [tex]
\nabla^2 \phi_{nm} = \lambda_{nm}\phi_{nm}[/tex] subject to [itex]\phi_{nm} = 0[/itex] on the boundary. These turn out to be products of trigonometric functions which are orthogonal with respect to the inner product [tex]
\langle f, g \rangle = \int \int f(x,y)g(x,y)\,dx\,dy[/tex] and the solution of [itex]\nabla^2 u = f[/itex] is [itex]u = \sum_{n,m} a_{nm} \phi_{nm}[/itex] where [tex]
\lambda_{nm}a_{nm}\|\phi_{nm}\|^2 = \langle f, \phi_{nm} \rangle.[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes Swamp Thing
  • #3
By setting [itex]f(x,y) = \delta(x - s)\delta(y - t)[/itex] we can recover the Green's function [tex]
G(x,y;s,t) = \sum_{n,m} \frac{\phi_{nm}(s,t)\phi_{nm}(x,y)}{\lambda_{nm}\|\phi_{nm}\|^2}.[/tex] and indeed [tex]
u(x,y) = \iint_A G(x,y;s,t)f(s,t)\,ds\,dt = \sum_{n,m} \frac{\langle f, \phi_{nm}\rangle}{\lambda_{nm}\|\phi_{nm}\|^2}[/tex] by swapping summation and integration.
 
  • #4
Thanks for the help!

I am new to this, so maybe this is a silly question...

I am trying this in Mathematica:
Code:
X = 10; Y = 10;
gf = GreenFunction[{-Laplacian[u[x, y], {x, y}],
   DirichletCondition[u[x, y] == 0, True]},
  u[x, y], {x, y} \[Element] Rectangle[{0, 0}, {X, Y}], {m, n}]
Plot3D[gf /. {m -> 0.7 X, n -> 0.3 Y} /. {\[Infinity] -> 50} //
   Activate // Evaluate, {x, 0, X}, {y, 0, Y}, PlotRange -> All]

Which gives this expression for the Green Function:
$$
\frac{1}{25} \underset{K[1]=1}{\overset{\infty }{\sum }}\underset{K[2]=1}{\overset{\infty }{\sum }}\frac{\sin \left(\frac{1}{10} m \pi K[1]\right) \sin \left(\frac{1}{10} \pi x K[1]\right) \sin \left(\frac{1}{10} n \pi K[2]\right) \sin \left(\frac{1}{10} \pi y K[2]\right)}{\frac{1}{100} \pi ^2 K[1]^2+\frac{1}{100} \pi ^2 K[2]^2}
$$

I am not sure about which symbols in Mathematica's formula correspond to which ones in your post. I am guessing, for example, that your m's and n's correspond to the K[1] and K[2] in the above formula? I have figured out that the m and n in the above correspond to the coordinates of the point excitation (Dirac function) but I am not sure of some of the other symbols in your post.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
It's best not to use [itex]m[/itex] and [itex]n[/itex] as real-valued quanties; by convention they are used as integer variables and doing otherwise will confuse people.

For your particular boundary conditions, the eigenfunctions are [tex]
\phi_{nm}(x,y) = \sin\left(\frac{n\pi x}{10}\right)\sin\left(\frac{m\pi y}{10}\right)[/tex] which has [itex]\|\phi_{nm}\| = 5[/itex] and the corresponding eigenvalues are [tex]
\lambda_{nm} = -\frac{\pi^2(n^2 + m^2)}{100}.[/tex] The result given by Mathematica differs by a sign compared to mine, but that is explained by you asking it to solve [itex]-\nabla^2 u = \delta(x - x_0)[/itex] rather than [itex]\nabla^2 \phi = \delta(x - x_0)[/itex].
 
  • #6
Yes, I think I better change the m and n to something else, like ##(x_d,y_d)## as a mnemonic that it's where the Dirac delta is located. The code I posted is from the examples in the Wolfram help page for GreenFunction.

Quick question about the usual workflow when doing this kind of problem from first principles: does the Fourier analysis help to determine the Green's function, OR, is the G.F. found by other means, after which you Fourier-analyze it in order to then get the time evolution?

Thanks again.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
726
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
884
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top