Mittag-Leffler Expansion for the Floating Elastic Plate Dispersion Relation

From WikiWaves

Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction

We derive here the important results that the Dispersion Relation for a Floating Elastic Plate can be written in the following form using the Mittag-Leffler expansion. This results is used to calculate the Free-Surface Green Function for a Floating Elastic Plate. The Mittag-Leffler expansion is a tool for expressing functions of a complex variable. We will use the Mittag-Leffler expansion to show that the function


\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\frac{1}{d\left(  \gamma,\omega\right)  }

where


d\left(  \gamma,\omega\right)  =\gamma^{4}+1-m\omega^{2}-\frac{\omega^{2}
}{\gamma\tanh\gamma H},

is the Dispersion Relation for a Floating Elastic Plate can be expressed by a linear sum of terms like 1/\left(  \gamma-a\right)  , a being a zero of d\left(  \gamma,\omega\right)  . We first remind ourselves of the Mittag-Leffler expansion that can be found in most text books on complex analysis, and then show that it can indeed be applied to \hat
{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  .

We will show that


\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\sum_{n=-2}^{\infty}\frac{2q_nR\left(
q_n\right)  }{\gamma^{2}-q_n^{2}}

where R\left(  q_n\right)  is the residue of \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  at γ = qn given by


R\left(  q_n\right)  =\frac{\omega^{2}q_n}{\omega^{2}\left(  5q_n^{4}+u\right)
+H\left[  \left(  q_n^{5}+uq_n\right)  ^{2}-\omega^{4}\right]  }.

where qn are the roots of the Dispersion Relation for a Floating Elastic Plate

 
-q^5 \sinh(kH) - k \left(1 - m\omega^2 \right) \sinh(kH) = 
-\omega^2 \cosh(kH)  \,

with n = − 1, − 2 corresponding to the complex solutions with positive imaginary part, n = 0 corresponding to the imaginary solution with negative real part and n > 0 corresponding to the imaginary solutions with positive imagainary part.

Mittag-Leffler expansion

Consider a function that is regular in the whole plane except at isolated points. A set of points is called isolated if there exists an open disk around each point that contains none other of the isolated points. Such a function is known as fractional function. We show that a fractional function that has an infinite number of poles can be expressed by infinite series of polynomials.

Let f\left(  \gamma\right)  be a fractional function that has an infinite number of poles. We note that a number of poles that are situated within a bounded region is always finite since the set of poles does not have limit-points. Indeed, if there is a limit-point γ = c then any small circle with centre at γ = c would contain an infinite number of poles. Once we have a finite number of poles in a confined part of the plane we can number them in the order of their non-decreasing moduli, so that denoting the poles by ai we have


\left|  a_{1}\right|  \leq\left|  a_{2}\right|  \leq\left| a_3\right|
\leq...,

where \left|  a_{i}\right|  \rightarrow\infty as i\rightarrow\infty. At every pole γ = ai the function f\left(  \gamma\right)  will have a definite infinite part, which will be a polynomial with respect to the argument 1/\left(  \gamma-a_{i}\right)  without the constant term. We denote this polynomial term by


G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)  ,\,\,i=1,2,3,...\,.

We show that the fractional function f\left(  \gamma\right)  can be represented by a simple infinite series of Gi by making certain additional assumptions. Suppose that a sequence of closed contours Cn which surround the origin exists and satisfies following conditions.

  1. None of poles of f\left(  \gamma\right) are on the contours C_{n},\,n=1,2,3,...
  2. Every contour Cn lies inside the contour Cn + 1.
  3. Let ln be length of the contour Cn and δn be its shortest distance from the origin then \delta_{n}\rightarrow\infty as n\rightarrow\infty , i.e., the contours Cn widen indefinitely in all directions as n increases.
  4. A positive number m exists such that
    \frac{l_{n}}{\delta_{n}}\leq m\quad \mathrm{for}\quad n=1,2,3,....

We now suppose that given such a sequence of contours, there exists a positive number M, such that on any contour Cn our fractional function f\left(\gamma\right)  satisfies \left|  f\left(  \gamma\right)  \right|  \leq M. Consider the integral


\frac{1}{2\pi\mathrm{i}}\int_{C_{n}}\frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}d\gamma^{\prime}\,\,\, (1)

where the point γ lies inside Cn and is other than ai (the poles inside Cn.) We also consider the sum of the polynomials for the poles ai, inside Cn,


\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\sum_{\left(  C_{n}\right)  }G_{i}\left(
\frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)  . \,\,\,(2)

The integrand of ((1)) has a pole \gamma^{\prime}=\gamma and poles \gamma^{\prime}=a_{i}. We can calculate the residue at the pole \gamma^{\prime}=\gamma by


\left.  \frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }{\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}-\gamma\right)  ^{\prime}}\right|  _{\gamma^{\prime}=\gamma}=\left.  f\left(
\gamma^{\prime}\right)  \right|  _{\gamma^{\prime}=\gamma}=f\left(
\gamma\right)  .

The residues at the poles \gamma^{\prime}=a_{i} are, by the definition (2), the same as the residues of the function


\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma
}.\,\,\, (3)

We note that all poles of this function are situated inside Cn. We now show that the sum of residues of function (3) at the poles ai is


-\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma\right)  =-\sum_{\left(  C_{n}\right)  }G_{i}\left(
\frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)  .\,\,\, (4)

Since the definition of ωn and Gi is a polynomial of 1/\left(
\gamma-a_{i}\right)  , the order of the denominator of function (3) is at least two units higher than that of the numerator of function (3). Hence, for a circle with a sufficiently large radius R, we have


2\pi\mathrm{i}\sum_{\left(  C_{n}\right)  }Res 
_{\gamma^{\prime}=a_{i}}\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)
}{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}=\oint_{C_{R}}\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}d\gamma^{\prime}.

The LHS of this does not change as the radius R increases, and the RHS\rightarrow0 as R\rightarrow\infty. Indeed,


\left|  \oint_{C_{R}}\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }
{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}d\gamma^{\prime}\right|  \leq\oint_{C_{R}}\left|
\gamma^{\prime}\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }
{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}\frac{1}{\gamma^{\prime}}d\gamma^{\prime}\right|
\leq\max_{\left|  \gamma^{\prime}\right|  =R}\left|  \gamma^{\prime}
\frac{\omega_{n}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma
}\right|  \frac{2\pi R}{R}

and the term \left|  \cdot\right|  tends to zero as R\rightarrow\infty. Thus, the sum of residues at poles within a finite distance is zero. Since we know that the residue of (3) at \gamma^{\prime}=\gamma is \omega_{n}\left(  \gamma\right)  , the sum of the rest is formula (4). Thus, we have an expression for the integral (1),


\frac{1}{2\pi\mathrm{i}}\int_{C_{n}}\frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}-\gamma}d\gamma^{\prime}=f\left(  \gamma\right)
-\sum_{\left(  C_{n}\right)  }G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)
. \,\,\,(5)

Also, when γ = 0 we have


\frac{1}{2\pi\mathrm{i}}\int_{C_{n}}\frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}}d\gamma^{\prime}=f\left(  0\right)  -\sum_{\left(
C_{n}\right)  }G_{i}\left(  -\frac{1}{a_{i}}\right)  . (6)

Subtracting Equation (5) from Equation (6) gives


\frac{\gamma}{2\pi\mathrm{i}}\int_{C_{n}}\frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime
}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}-\gamma\right)  }
d\gamma^{\prime}=f\left(  \gamma\right)  -f\left(  0\right)  -\sum_{\left(
C_{n}\right)  }\left[  G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)
-G_{i}\left(  -\frac{1}{a_{i}}\right)  \right]  .

We now prove that the integrand on the LHS of this expression tends to zero as n\rightarrow\infty. Since, \left|  \gamma^{\prime}\right|  \geq\delta
_{n},\,\,\left|  \gamma^{\prime}-\gamma\right|  \geq\left|  \gamma^{\prime
}\right|  -\left|  \gamma\right|  \geq\delta_{n}-\left|  \gamma\right|  , we have

\begin{matrix}
\left|  \int_{C_{n}}\frac{f\left(  \gamma^{\prime}\right)  }{\gamma^{\prime
}\left(  \gamma^{\prime}-\gamma\right)  }d\gamma^{\prime}\right|   & \leq
\frac{Ml_{n}}{\delta_{n}\left(  \delta_{n}-\left|  \gamma\right|  \right)
}\\
& <\frac{Mm}{\delta_{n}-\left|  \gamma\right|  }.\,\,\, (7)
\end{matrix}

Since \delta_{n}\rightarrow\infty as n\rightarrow\infty and {\bf condition 4}, the integral in inequality (7) tends to zero as n increases.

Finally, we have formula for f\left(  \gamma\right)  ,


f\left(  \gamma\right)  =f\left(  0\right)  +\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}
\sum_{\left(  C_{n}\right)  }\left[  G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}
}\right)  -G_{i}\left(  -\frac{1}{a_{i}}\right)  \right]  .

Since, the contour Cn will widen indefinitely as n increases, the second term is a sum over all poles, so we have f\left(  \gamma\right)  in the form of an infinite series


f\left(  \gamma\right)  =f\left(  0\right)  +\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\left[
G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-a_{i}}\right)  -G_{i}\left(  -\frac{1}{a_{i}
}\right)  \right]  .

For the expansion formula of \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  , the polynomial term is


G_{i}\left(  \frac{1}{\gamma-q_{i}}\right)  =\frac{R\left(  q_{i}\right)
}{\gamma-q_{i}}.

Expansion of the Dispersion Relation for a Floating Elastic Plate

Now we show that the function


\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\frac{1}{d\left(  \gamma,\omega\right)  }

where


d\left(  \gamma,\omega\right)  =\gamma^{4}+1-m\omega^{2}-\frac{\omega^{2}
}{\gamma\tanh\gamma H},
satisfies the

conditions for the Mittag-Leffler expansion.

Define a sequence of square contours Cn, square with its four corners at εn − iεn, εn + iεn, − εn + iεn and − εn − iεn, where \epsilon_{n}=\left(
n+\frac{1}{2}\right)  \pi/H,\,n=N,N+1,.... We start by showing that \left|
\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  \right|  is bounded on any Cn in order to follow the proof of Mittag-Leffler expansion given in the previous subsection.

Before beginning we recall that qn are the roots of the Dispersion Relation for a Floating Elastic Plate

 
-q^5 \sinh(kH) - k \left(1 - m\omega^2 \right) \sinh(kH) = 
-\omega^2 \cosh(kH)  \,

with n = − 1, − 2 corresponding to the complex solutions with positive imaginary part, n = 0 corresponding to the imaginary solution with negative real part and n > 0 corresponding to the imaginary solutions with positive imagainary part.

For the sake of simplicity, write u = 1 − mω2. When Imγ is large the poles of \hat{w} are almost \pm\mathrm{i}
n\pi/H. In fact, the poles \left\{  \mathrm{i}q_{n}\right\}
_{n=1,2,...}, q_{n}\in\mathbb{R} of \hat{w} satisfy


\frac{1}{\left(  q_{n}+u\right)  q_{n}}=\tan\left(  q_{n}H\right)  ,

so \gamma_{n}\rightarrow\pm n\pi/H as n increases. Thus, by choosing a large N, the contour Cn is always a certain distance away from the poles for any n\geq N. We prove the boundedness of \left|  \hat{w}\right|
by showing that \left|  \hat{w}\left(  x+\mathrm{i}y\right)
\right|  is bounded for y=\pm\epsilon_{n}, n = N,N + 1,..., and x,y\in\mathbb{R}, and then for x=\pm\epsilon_{n},\,n=N,N+1,..., y\in\left[  -\epsilon_{n},\epsilon_{n}\right]  .

For any n > N we have


\left|  \gamma^{4}+u\right|    >\left|  \gamma\right|  ^{4}+C=\left|
x+\mathrm{i}y\right|  ^{4}+C

\geq\epsilon_{n}^{4}+C\,\,\mathrm{for}\, \mathrm{any}\,\, x\in\mathbb{R},\,y=\epsilon
_{n},

where C is a constant determined by u. When y = εn we have


\left|  \frac{1}{\gamma\tanh\left(  \gamma H\right)  }\right|    =\left|
\frac{e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}+1}{\left(  x+\mathrm{i}y\right)
\left(  e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}-1\right)  }\right|

=\frac{\left|  e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}+1\right|  }{\left|
x+\mathrm{i}y\right|  \left|  e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}-1\right|
}

 =\frac{\left|  e^{2xH}-1\right|  }{\left|  x+\mathrm{i}y\right|
\left|  e^{2xH}+1\right|  }\leq\frac{1}{\left|  x+\mathrm{i}y\right|
}\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon_{n}}

for any x\in\mathbb{R}. (We used \exp\left(  \mathrm{i}\left(
2n+1\right)  \pi\right)  =-1 and


\left|  \frac{e^{2xH}-1}{e^{2xH}+1}\right|  \leq1

to show this.) For large \left|  \gamma\right|  we have


\left|  \gamma^{4}+u-\frac{\omega^{2}}{\gamma\tanh\left(  \gamma H\right)
}\right|  \geq\left|  \gamma^{4}+u\right|  -\left|  \frac{\omega^{2}}
{\gamma\tanh\left(  \gamma H\right)  }\right|  .

Since the RHS of this inequality is positive from the previous equations,


\left|  \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  \right|  \leq\frac{1}{\left|  \gamma
^{4}+u\right|  -\left|  \frac{\omega^{2}}{\gamma\tanh\left(  \gamma H\right)
}\right|  }\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon_{n}^{4}+C-\frac{\omega^{2}}{\epsilon_{n}}
}

for any n\geq N. Note that the same relationship holds for y = − εn.

For γ on the line segment εn − iεn to εn + iεn we use the fact that


\frac{\left|  e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}+1\right|  }{\left|
x+\mathrm{i}y\right|  \left|  e^{2xH}e^{\mathrm{i}2yH}-1\right|
}\leq\frac{1}{\left|  x+\mathrm{i}y\right|  }\frac{1+\left|
e^{-2xH}\right|  }{1-\left|  e^{-2xH}\right|  }\leq\frac{E_{N}}{\epsilon_{N}}

for any y, n\geq N, where EN is defined as


\frac{1+\left|  e^{-2xH}\right|  }{1-\left|  e^{-2xH}\right|  }\leq
\frac{1+\left|  e^{-2\epsilon_{N}H}\right|  }{1-\left|  e^{-2\epsilon_{N}
H}\right|  }=E_{N}\,\,=, = \frac{1}{\left|  x+\mathrm{i}y\right|
}\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon_{N}}.

Therefore


\frac{1}{\left|  \gamma^{4}+u\right|  -\left|  \frac{\omega^{2}}{\gamma
\tanh\left(  \gamma H\right)  }\right|  }\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon_{N}^{4}
+C-\frac{\omega^{2}E_{N}}{\epsilon_{N}}}

for any n\geq N. The same proof can be applied for the line segment − εn − iεn to − εn + iεn. We have proved that \left|  \hat{w}\left(
\gamma\right)  \right|  is bounded on all sides of the contours C_{n},\,n\geq N where N is chosen to be large so that the contours are a certain distance away from all the poles of \hat{w}.

Hence, the expansion of \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  becomes, from \hat{w}\left(  0\right)  =0,


\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\sum_{n=-2}^{\infty}\left[  \frac{R\left(  q_n\right)
}{\gamma-q_n}+\frac{R\left(  q_n\right)  }{q_n}\right]  =\sum_{n=-2}^{\infty}
\left[  \frac{2q_nR\left(  q_n\right)  }{\gamma^{2}-q_n^{2}}+\frac{2R\left(
q_n\right)  }{q_n}\right]  .

Note that the summation on the first line is over all poles of \hat{w}\left(
\gamma\right)  . Note that R\left(  q\right)  =-R\left(  -q\right)  , since \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  is an even function and


-\left(  \gamma-q\right)  \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  =\left(
-\gamma+q\right)  \hat{w}\left(  -\gamma\right)  =\left(  \gamma+q\right)
\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  .

Note that the term \sum2R\left(  q\right)  /q is zero. Indeed, expansion of the function \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  \gamma which has the same analytic properties and poles as the function \hat{w} and residues R\left(
q\right)  q at γ = q. Hence, \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  \gamma is expanded as,


\hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  \gamma=\sum_{n=-2}^{\infty}\left[  \frac{q_nR\left(
q_n\right)  }{\gamma-q_n}+\frac{q_nR\left(  q_n\right)  }{q_n}\right]  = \sum_{n=-2}^{\infty}
\frac{2\gamma q_nR\left(  q_n\right)  }{\gamma^{2}-q_n^{2}}.

The fact that \sum2R\left(  q\right)  /q is zero can also be confirmed by using the contour integration of the function \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)
/\gamma. The function \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  /\gamma is an odd function and has the same poles as the function \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  with the residues R\left(  q\right)  /q. Notice that γ = 0 is not a singular point of \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  /\gamma. Hence, the integration over the real axis is zero and \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  /\gamma\rightarrow0 on the semi-arc with order of A − 3 as A\rightarrow\infty.

The residues R\left(  q\right)  can be calculated using the usual formula. Since each of the poles of \hat{w}\left(  \gamma\right)  is simple, the residue R\left(  q\right)  at a pole q can be found using the expression

\begin{matrix}
R\left(  q\right)   & =\left[  \left.  \frac{d}{d\gamma}d\left(  \gamma
,\omega\right)  \right|  _{\gamma=q}\right]  ^{-1}\\
& =\left[  4q^{3}+\omega^{2}\left(  \frac{qH+\tanh qH-qH\tanh^{2}qH}
{q^{2}\tanh^{2}qH}\right)  \right]  ^{-1}. 
\end{matrix}

As each pole q is a root of the dispersion equation, we may substitute \tanh qH=\omega^{2}/\left(  q^{5}+uq\right)  , where for brevity we have defined u=\left(  1-m\omega^{2}\right)  . The residue may then be given as the rational function of the pole


R\left(  q\right)  =\frac{\omega^{2}q}{\omega^{2}\left(  5q^{4}+u\right)
+H\left[  \left(  q^{5}+uq\right)  ^{2}-\omega^{4}\right]  }.

This form avoids calculation of the hyperbolic tangent which becomes small at the imaginary roots. This causes numerical round-off problems since qnH tends to nπ as n becomes large, which makes tanqnH become small.

Personal tools