Analytical solution for 2D Advection-diffusion equation considering Dirichlet/Neumann BC

436 Views Asked by At

I am looking for the analytical solution of 2D Advection-diffusion equation on a rectangular domain $\Omega= (0, a)\times(0, b)$ considering: \begin{equation} \begin{split} & C_t +\lambda C + \nabla\cdot\mathbf{u}C - \nabla\cdot(\mathbf{D} \nabla C) = 0, \text{ for } (x, y, t) \in \Omega \times \mathbb{R^*_+} , \\ & C(x,y,t=0) = \rho(x,y) = f(x)g(y), \text{ for } (x,y) \in \Omega,\\ & f(x) =\left\{ \begin{array}{cl} 1, &x \in [x_0,x_1]\\ 0, & \text{elsewhere}\\ \end{array} \right. g(y) = \left\{ \begin{array}{cl} 1, &y \in [y_0,y_1]\\ 0, & \text{elsewhere}\\ \end{array} \right. \\ & C(x=0,y,t) = C(x=a,y,t) = 0, t \in \mathbb{R^*_+},\\ & \partial_y C(x,y=0,t) = \partial_y C(x,y=b,t) = 0, t \in \mathbb{R^*_+},\\ & \mathbf{u}=(u_x=0,u_y=cst>0) \label{problem} \end{split} \end{equation}

The objective of my post is to verify that the solution calculated with a numerical solver (OpenFOAM...) comply with the analytical solution.

I have successfully managed to find the solution for pure Dirichlet BC and verified the compliance between the numerical solver, but I have some "doubts" when I introduce the Neumann BC $\partial_y C(x,y=0,t) = \partial_y C(x,y=b,t) = 0$.

My very first question is: is the problem well-posed? I had a look on related topic and I found this. However my problem is a bit different than the one described and I don't really know if the answer is applicable here. My concern is that since $C(x,y=0,t) = C(x,y=b,t) \neq 0$, intuitively, we expect "mass injection" at the $C(x,y=0,t)$ for $t \in \mathbb{R^*_+}$. Having tried to solve the problem with OpenFOAM, I get quickly a "diverging solution" where the mass is increasing seemingly indefinitely. Having tried with another solver the solution does not diverge, despite the "mass injection". I would like to decide between the solvers.

My second question holds only if the problem is well-posed. In order to find the solution I used the classical separation of variables method $C(x,y,t)=X(x)Y(y)T(t)$. When I want to solve $Y(y)$, I consider that the form of the solution is: \begin{equation} Y(y)=\exp{(\gamma y)}\big(A\cos{(\eta y)}+B\sin{(\eta y)}\big), \end{equation} where $\gamma\pm i\eta$ are the complex solutions of the corresponding characteristic polynomial: \begin{equation} \begin{split} \gamma\pm i\eta & =\frac{-u_x}{-2D_x}\pm i\frac{\sqrt{|\Delta|}}{-2D_x}, \\ & =\frac{u_x}{2D_x}\pm i\frac{\sqrt{|\Delta|}}{2D_x}. \end{split} \end{equation} With the the previously defined BC, I have to solve the following system: \begin{equation} \begin{split} \partial_yY(0)=\exp{(\gamma 0)}\big((\gamma A+\eta B)\cos{(\eta 0)}+(\gamma B-\eta A)\sin{(\eta 0)}\big) & = 0,\\ \partial_yY(b)=\exp{(\gamma b)}\big((\gamma A+\eta B)\cos{(\eta b)}+(\gamma B-\eta A)\sin{(\eta b)}\big) & = 0. \end{split} \end{equation} The solutions of the previous system are: \begin{equation} \begin{split} A = -\frac{\eta B}{\gamma },\\ B\bigg(\gamma+\frac{\eta^2}{\gamma}\bigg)\sin{(\eta b)} & = 0, \gamma \neq 0. \end{split} \end{equation} In order to satisfy the second equation of the previous system I choose (considering a Fourier series to come): \begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta &= \eta(m) = \eta_m = \frac{m\pi}{b},\\ B & = B(m)=B_m,~m\in\mathbb{N^*}. \end{split} \end{equation} The form of the solutions is: \begin{equation} Y_0(y)= B_m\exp{(\gamma y)}\bigg(-\frac{\eta_m}{\gamma }\cos{(\eta_m y)}+\sin{(\eta_m y)}\bigg),~m\in\mathbb{N^*}, \gamma \neq 0. \end{equation}

I have a question at this stage, unlike for the Dirichlet BC solution, I notice that $\gamma\neq0$ which means that the solution does not stand anymore if $u_y=0$. How should I interpret this considering the concern express in my first question?

Pursuing with the normalization I have to calculate the scalar product of two eigenfunctions which leads formally to: \begin{equation} \begin{split} N^2_{jk} & = \int_0^b \bigg(-\frac{j\pi}{b\gamma}\cos{(\frac{j\pi y}{b})}+\sin{(\frac{j\pi y}{b})}\bigg) \bigg(-\frac{k\pi}{b\gamma }\cos{(\frac{k\pi y}{b})}+\sin{(\frac{k\pi y}{b})}\bigg) dy,\\ N^2_{jk} & = \bigg(\frac{jk\pi^2}{2b\gamma^2} + \frac{b}{2}\bigg)\delta_{jk},\\ N_{j=k} & = \sqrt{\frac{j^2\pi^2}{2b\gamma^2} + \frac{b}{2}}. \end{split} \end{equation} I notice that norm won't be constant with regard to $m$ (or $j,k$) for the Fourier series like with the Dirichlet BC. Again, How should I interpret this?

$B_m$ Fourier series coefficients are determined through: \begin{equation} \begin{split} B_m&=\frac{1}{N_{j=k=m}}\int_{0}^b \exp{(-\gamma y)}g(y)\bigg(-\frac{\eta_m}{\gamma }\cos{(\eta_m y)}+\sin{(\eta_m y)}\bigg)d y,\\ B_m & = \bigg(\frac{m^2\pi^2}{2b\gamma^2} + \frac{b}{2}\bigg)^{-\frac{1}{2}}\bigg[ -\frac{1}{\gamma}\exp(-\gamma y)\sin{(\eta_m y)}\bigg]_{y_0}^{y_1}, \end{split} \end{equation}

Finally, when I try to calculate the solution it doesn't seem to give consistent results.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

In case this may help some people, after trials and errors I finally figured out that the normalization factor $N^2_m$ had to be applied...

If I trust the calculation, I guess I can also conclude that the problem is well-posed...

Best regards,

Example of time evolution of 2D advection-diffusion analytical solution with Dirichlet(X)/Neumann(Y) BC