Problem with Unknown Boundary

The solution of the inverse problem is of principal commercial importance. However, the exact solution of this problem is difficult, because it requires the solution of a problem with unknown boundaries. Therefore, for the automation of the design of ECM operations, the following approach is used the inverse problem is reduced to the solution of a series of direct problems and, by solving them, the TE working surface and the machining parameters are corrected. 

Note that all integrals in Eq. 2 are boundary integrals, i.e., they involve only the boundary values of the dependent variable and its derivatives. As such, this integral equation can be employed to obtain the unknown boundary quantities based on the given boundary conditions. For example, for Dirichlet problems, the unknown boundary values are the normal derivatives of the potential, which can be calculated by solving Eq. 2 with evaluation points being on the boundary. Once all the boundary quantities are obtained, the potential at any point inside the... 

The general class of free boundary flow problems can, however, be modelled using the volume of fluid (VOF) approach (Nichols et ai, 1980). The main concept in this technique is to solve, simultaneously with the governing flow equations, an additional equation that represents the unknown boundary. Three different versions of this method are described in the following sections. 

We would like to stress at this point that the derivation of (1.36) and (1.38)-(1.39) is connected with the simulation of contact problems and therefore contains some assumptions of a mechanical character. This remark is concerned with the sign of the function p in the problem (1.36) and with the direction of the vector pi,P2,p) in the problem (1.38), (1.39). Note that the classical approach to contact problems is characterized by a given contact set (Galin, 1980 Kikuchi, Oden, 1988 Grigolyuk, Tolkachev, 1980). In contact problems considered in the book, the contact set is unknown, and we obtain the so called free boundary problems. Other free boundary problems can be found in (Hoffmann, Sprekels, 1990 Elliot, Ock-endon, 1982 Antontsev et ah, 1990 Kinderlehrer et ah, 1979 Antontsev et ah, 1992 Plotnikov, 1995). 

The MADONNA software allows an automatic, iterative solution of boundary value problems. Selecting Model/Modules/Boundary Value ODE prompts for the boundary condition input Set S = 1 at X=1 with unknowns Sguess. Allowing... 

A closely related method is that of Boley (B8), who was concerned with aerodynamic ablation of a one-dimensional solid slab. The domain is extended to some fixed boundary, such as X(0), to which an unknown temperature is applied such that the conditions at the moving boundary are satisfied. This leads to two functional equations for the unknown boundary position and the fictitious boundary temperature, and would, therefore, appear to be more complicated for iterative solution than the Kolodner method. Boley considers two problems, the first of which is the ablation of a slab of finite thickness subjected on both faces to mixed boundary conditions (Newton s law of cooling). The one-dimensional heat equation is once again... 

Therefore, Eq, (4.27) together with the boundary conditions of Eqs. (4.28-4.31) provide a definition of the problem of pressure P(x, y, t) with an unknown boundary Xo(y, t) provided that function q(t) specifying the pressure at the exit from a point gat into a cavity is known. In practice, function P0(t) is known having determined the mass balance function q(t), the final formulation takes the form ... 

The Madonna software allows an automatic, iterative solution of boundary value problems. Selecting Boundary Value from the Model menu prompts for the boundary condition input Set S=1 at X=1 with unknowns Sguess. Allowing Sguess to vary between 0.5 and 0.6 gives a solution that approaches Sguess=0.562. After an additional RUN command the solution is shown. It is also instructive to use the manual slider method, as explained above. 

In this section, we have seen how one may formulate numerical strategies for confronting the types of boundary value problems that arise in the continuum description of materials. The key point is the replacement of the problem involving unknown continuum fields with a discrete reckoning of the problem in which only a discrete set of unknowns at particular points (i.e. the nodes) are to be determined. In the next chapter we will undertake the consideration of the methods of quantum mechanics, and in this setting will find once again that the finite element method offers numerical flexibility in solving differential equations. 

One of the problems with the CMAS projection is that, whilst it uses all the chemical constituents of a rock analysis and so is applicable to natural rocks, the effects of individual components cannot be easily identified. The converse problem derives from the small number of components used in the experimental system, for the effects of small amounts of additional components on the position of the phase boundaries is largely unknown. Na is likely to have the most important effect (Thompson, 1987), but Fe (Heizberg, 1992), H2O (Adam, 1988) and possibly Ti are also Ukely to influence the position of the phase boundari. ... 

Also, in the case of problems with an unknown boundary problem, we can have zero, one, or infinite solutions. 

In the experimental study by Zhu et al. (1998), the heating pattern induced by a microwave antenna was quantified by solving the inverse problem of heat conduction in a tissue equivalent gel. In this approach, detailed temperature distribution in the gel is required and predicted by solving a two- or three-dimensional heat conduction equation in the gel. In the experimental study, all the temperature probes were not required to be placed in the near field of the catheter. Experiments were first performed in the gel to measure the temperature elevation induced by the applicator. An expression with several unknown parameters was proposed for the SAR distribution. Then, a theoretical heat transfer model was developed with appropriate boundary conditions and initial condition of the experiment to study the temperature distribution in the gel. The values of those unknown parameters in the proposed SAR expression were initially assumed and the temperatiue field in the gel was calculated by the model. The parameters were then adjusted to minimize the square error of the deviations theoretically predict from the experimentally measured temperatures at all temperature sensor locations. 

With the boundary conditions as represented by equations (23), (2b), (27), (34) and the problem formulated as shown in equation (17), a system of n equations in 4n unknowns with 2n boundary equations has been obtained. In order to derive a solvable system of equations it was found necessary to use equation (35) to provide a further n equations to give 2n equations in 2n unknowns. 

Solution of the above equation by the method of characteristics [283] is described in Ref 282, earlier examples being found in Refs. 284-286. They will not be reproduced here, for the sake of brevity. If G(s) is to be evaluated, in order to take advantage of the numerical inversion formula Eq. (119), or if average degrees of polymerization in the presence of gel have to be predicted, numerical solution of Eq. (127) leads to a two-point boundary solution problem with twice as many unknowns as the number of derivative terms log s (the number of active groups in the polymer). 

In the spectral SFEM, the random parameter fields are discretized by a KL or a polynomial chaos expansion, the solution is expanded with Hermite polynomials, and a Galerkin approach is applied to solve for the unknown expansion coefficients. The theoretical foundation has been laid in Deb et al. (2001) and Babuska et al. (2005), where local and global polynomial chaos expansions for linear elliptic boundary value problems with stochastic coefficients were investigated and where a priori error estimates have been proved for a fixed number of terms of the KL expansion. 

The model describing interaction between two bodies, one of which is a deformed solid and the other is a rigid one, we call a contact problem. After the deformation, the rigid body (called also punch or obstacle) remains invariable, and the solid must not penetrate into the punch. Meanwhile, it is assumed that the contact area (i.e. the set where the boundary of the deformed solid coincides with the obstacle surface) is unknown a priori. This condition is physically acceptable and is called a nonpenetration condition. We intend to give a mathematical description of nonpenetration conditions to diversified models of solids for contact and crack problems. Indeed, as one will see, the nonpenetration of crack surfaces is similar to contact problems. In this subsection, the contact problems for two-dimensional problems characterizing constraints imposed inside a domain are considered. 

In this section we consider the boundary value problem for model equations of a thermoelastic plate with a vertical crack (see Khludnev, 1996d). The unknown functions in the mathematical model under consideration are such quantities as the temperature 9 and the horizontal and vertical displacements W = (w, w ), w of the mid-surface points of the plate. We use the so-called coupled model of thermoelasticity, which implies in particular that we need to solve simultaneously the equations that describe heat conduction and the deformation of the plate. The presence of the crack leads to the fact that the domain of a solution has a nonsmooth boundary. As before, the main feature of the problem as a whole is the existence of a constraint in the form of an inequality imposed on the crack faces. This constraint provides a mutual nonpenetration of the crack faces ... 

Some situations, however result in the form of second-order diffferential equations, which often give rise to problems of the split boundary type. In order to solve this type of problem, an iterative method of solution is required, in which an unknown condition at the starting point is guessed, the differential equation integrated twice and the resulting solution compared with a known boundary condition, obtained at the end point of the calculation. Any error between the known value and the calculated value can then be used to revise the initial starting guess for the next iteration. This procedure is then repeated until... 

---