Math Help Forum

Math Help Forum Feed Site Feed

Go Back   Math Help Forum > University Math Help > Differential Equations
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 5th, 2009, 08:54 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 17
Country:
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
jfortiv is on a distinguished road
Default [SOLVED] Wave equation solution coefficients (all real?)

Hello,

I'm trying to understand the solution to the wave equation for an Euler-Bernoulli beam as written in Inman's "Engineering Vibration" text. The solution involves separation of variables, which leads to the following expression in X(x):

X''''(x) - b^4*X(x) = 0 , where b^4 = w^2/c^2 (1)

The book assumes a solution of the form X(x) = A*exp(sigma*x) and leaves the general solution derivation up to the reader, yielding:

X(x) = a1*sin(b*x) + a2*cos(b*x) + a3*sinh(b*x) + a4*cosh(b*x) (2)


Here is my calculation of the general solution:

Plugging A*exp(sigma*x) into (1) yields:

sigma^4 - b^4 = 0; sigma = b, -b, i*b, -i*b, where i=sqrt(-1)

I create solution from these sigma values:

X(x) = c1*exp(bx) + c2*exp(-bx) + c3*exp(ibx) + c4*exp(-ibx)

I use the following Euler equation forms:

cosh(x) + sinh(x) = exp(x)
cosh(x) - sinh(x) = exp(-x)
cos(x) + i*sin(x) = exp(ix)
cos(x) - i*sin(x) = exp(-ix)

When I work these out for X(x), I always end up with an i attached to the sign term:

X(x) = a1*i*sin(bx) + a2*cos(bx) + a3*sinh(bx) + a4*cosh(bx), where each an is a rearrangement of the cn coefficients.

How did they just drop the i out in the solution above (2)? Can someone make sense of this?

Thanks!
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old November 5th, 2009, 03:34 PM
Danny's Avatar
MHF Contributor

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Conway AR
Posts: 1,393
Country:
Thanks: 43
Thanked 619 Times in 577 Posts
Danny is a splendid one to beholdDanny is a splendid one to beholdDanny is a splendid one to beholdDanny is a splendid one to beholdDanny is a splendid one to beholdDanny is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfortiv View Post
Hello,

I'm trying to understand the solution to the wave equation for an Euler-Bernoulli beam as written in Inman's "Engineering Vibration" text. The solution involves separation of variables, which leads to the following expression in X(x):

X''''(x) - b^4*X(x) = 0 , where b^4 = w^2/c^2 (1)

The book assumes a solution of the form X(x) = A*exp(sigma*x) and leaves the general solution derivation up to the reader, yielding:

X(x) = a1*sin(b*x) + a2*cos(b*x) + a3*sinh(b*x) + a4*cosh(b*x) (2)


Here is my calculation of the general solution:

Plugging A*exp(sigma*x) into (1) yields:

sigma^4 - b^4 = 0; sigma = b, -b, i*b, -i*b, where i=sqrt(-1)

I create solution from these sigma values:

X(x) = c1*exp(bx) + c2*exp(-bx) + c3*exp(ibx) + c4*exp(-ibx)

I use the following Euler equation forms:

cosh(x) + sinh(x) = exp(x)
cosh(x) - sinh(x) = exp(-x)
cos(x) + i*sin(x) = exp(ix)
cos(x) - i*sin(x) = exp(-ix)

When I work these out for X(x), I always end up with an i attached to the sign term:

X(x) = a1*i*sin(bx) + a2*cos(bx) + a3*sinh(bx) + a4*cosh(bx), where each an is a rearrangement of the cn coefficients.

How did they just drop the i out in the solution above (2)? Can someone make sense of this?

Thanks!
From parts of your post in red

X(x) = c_1\left(\cosh b x + \sinh b x \right)+ c_2\left(\cosh b x - \sinh b x \right) + c_3\left(\cos b x + i \sin b x \right)+ c_3\left(\cos b x - i \sin b x \right)

then re-group

X(x) = \left(c_1 + c_2 \right) \cosh b x + \left(c_1 - c_2 \right) \sinh b x + \left(c_3+c_4 \right) \cos b x + i \left(c_3-c_4 \right) \sin b x,

then let

a_1 = c_1 + c_2, \;\;a_2 = c_1 - c_2, \;\;a_3 = c_3+c_4, \;\;a_4 = i \left(c_3-c_4 \right).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old November 5th, 2009, 08:30 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 17
Country:
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
jfortiv is on a distinguished road
Default

Thanks Danny,

I got to that point. Does the final statement about a4 imply that it must be purely imaginary? I guess that c3 and c4 could potentially be imaginary also, thereby yielding a real-only a4. It's still bothering me a little.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old November 6th, 2009, 08:56 AM
Super Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 599
Country:
Thanks: 46
Thanked 261 Times in 226 Posts
shawsend is a jewel in the roughshawsend is a jewel in the roughshawsend is a jewel in the roughshawsend is a jewel in the rough
Default

It would help I think if you viewed (or at least thought about) the differential equations in terms of the underlying complex-variable analog. For example, when you see the equation y''+y=0, you immediately think of real variables and real solutions but that equation is perfectly acceptable in terms of complex variables and complex solutions of the form:

\frac{d^2 w}{dz^2}+z=0

w(z)=c_1 e^{iz}+c_2 e^{-iz}

in which w,z,c_1,c_2 are all complex. And when we seek the real solution, we're actually solving the complex analog as a convenience in terms of the complex exponential and then finding the solution along the real axis which has a zero imaginary component. And we accomplish this by suitably adjusting the (complex) constants c_1 and c_2 to achieve this although we often do so mechanically and without thinking about the underlying complex solution. So in the case above, we write w(z) as:

w(z)=(c_1+c_2) \cos(z)+i(c_1-c_2)\sin(z)

and since c_1 and c_2 are arbitrary, then i(c_1-c_2) is also arbitrary and can be any number including a real one. It might better help to see this if one solves directly for c_1 and c_2 above so that we obtain a purely real solution (along the real axis) for say the IVP:

w''+w=0,\quad w(0)=w_0,\quad w'(0)=w_1,\quad w_0=1 ,w_1=2

That's c_1+c_2=w_0 and i(c_1-c_2)=w_1 which gives c_1=1/2(w_0-iw_1) and c_2=1/2(w_0+iw_1).

I've then plotted the real surface and imaginary surface of the complex solution for this IVP below. The first plot shows a yellow contour along the real axis which is the real solution commonly obtained when one solves the real IVP. Note in the second plot, the imaginary solution along the real axis in this case is zero.
Attached Thumbnails
solved-wave-equation-solution-coefficients-all-real-realsolution.jpg  solved-wave-equation-solution-coefficients-all-real-imagsolution.jpg  
__________________
"I am beset by the ironies in my life"

Last edited by shawsend; November 6th, 2009 at 10:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank shawsend for this useful post:
Donate to MHF
  #5  
Old November 6th, 2009, 11:49 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 17
Country:
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
jfortiv is on a distinguished road
Default

Shawsend,

Thank you so much for the explanation (both verbal and graphical)! This is now very clear to me. I appreciate it.

Fantastic forum. I'm glad I found it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
©2005 - 2009 Math Help Forum


Math Help Forum is a community of maths forums with an emphasis on maths help in all levels of mathematics.
Register to post your math questions or just hang out and try some of our math games or visit the arcade.