Introduce , , and write . The method of multiple scales gives . At order , the resonant forcing is , because multiplication by generates only a constant and second harmonics. The solvability condition in the method of multiple scales therefore gives . A nonresonant particular correction is
At order , the forcing is . Its coefficient is . Removing this secular term gives
Put , so . The slow amplitudes for the second Mathieu instability tongue satisfy
The initial conditions here are at leading order; a homogeneous correction makes the original data exact without changing . For example its initial cosine coefficient is in the chosen gauge. The slow squared growth rate is . Thus the robust leading stable ranges are
Set in those ranges. The required explicit leading solution is
The remainder is uniform for , with fixed and fixed away from a changing instability edge. Inside , put ; replace the slow cosine and by and . The initial data excite this growing solution, so the leading solution is unstable.
At the leading endpoints the slow matrix is degenerate. Its continuous limits give at , and for these particular initial data at ; generic initial phases at the latter endpoint have slow algebraic growth. These are leading, not exact, instability edges. To specify the exact small- endpoint status, put , so the Mathieu equation has characteristic parameter and coupling . In the orthonormal cosine basis , the matrix has diagonal and adjacent couplings ; in the sine basis , the diagonal is and adjacent couplings are . Expanding the roots near of their determinants yields
These truncations determine the displayed orders because reaching the next omitted mode and returning requires at least six coupling steps. The fourth-order edges of the second Mathieu instability tongue are therefore
Floquet theory gives the unstable gap near this resonance. In particular, both fixed values and lie outside the exact gap for sufficiently small nonzero . Their fixed- solutions are bounded, although the leading slow matrix alone does not show this and the amplification bound is not uniform as .
Use and the WKB approximation
At leading order, the divergence-form acoustic Helmholtz equation becomes . The sloping-wall Neumann boundary condition becomes at . In the even transverse family this has normal modes , where , and
For the right-going propagating branch take real positive . The displayed local expression in the question must be read as a frozen-coefficient shorthand: the actual slowly varying phase is . Differentiating would instead give the erroneous local wavenumber .
The symmetric duct also has odd transverse normal modes . The integer-cosine form selects the even family requested here, rather than representing every duct mode. The approximation requires smooth slow variation and a positive separated from cutoff; it fails in a cutoff transition.
Let , , and . At the next order of the WKB approximation, the transverse operator gives
The moving-wall Neumann boundary condition gives and . Multiply by and integrate across the duct. Since and at both walls, integration by parts gives
Also , because at both walls. Substituting these identities in the next-order equation produces the transport equation for the variable-sound-speed WKB duct amplitude:
Consequently is a complex constant, including a constant phase. For , ; for , , with the factor two absorbed into the mode's arbitrary constant. Thus
Equivalently,
There is an independent flux check. The real-coefficient Helmholtz equation implies , and the wall condition gives zero normal flux. Hence the integrated longitudinal current is constant; at leading order it is . This agrees with the transport equation. The factor must be retained: using only would ignore the variable coefficient in the given divergence-form equation.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.