In fluid mechanics, Boussinesq wave theory
consists of several equations to describe waves on a liquid’s surface.
It was the first attempt to explain the nonlinear phenomenon of solitons,
which were not predicted by the linear theories existing at the time.
We rewrite the former using the velocity potential Ψ for u
and the gravitational potential Φ for g,
such that u=∇Ψ and g=−∇Φ.
We also use a vector identity:
−∇Φ−ρ∇p=∇∂t∂Ψ+21∇∣u∣2+(∇×∇Ψ)×u
Recall that the curl of a gradient is always zero, so the last term disappears.
Integrating in space yields integration constants C(t) and p0,
the latter representing atmospheric pressure:
∂t∂Ψ+21∣u∣2=−Φ+ρp0−p+C
Consider a rectangular channel of depth h
extending infinitely far along the x-axis,
with a finite width along the y-axis.
We choose our coordinate system so that
z=0 is the equilibrium water level,
and the bottom is at z=−h.
Let η(x,t) be the deformation of the surface,
for which we want to find a wave equation.
All quantities are assumed to be constant in y,
so we only consider a 2D flow u=(u(x),u(z)).
At the surface z=η we thus have:
∂t∂Ψ+21((u(x))2+(u(z))2)=−gη+ρp0−p+C
Where gη=Φ with g≈9.81m/s2 on Earth.
Later, we will differentiate this formula in x,
so we can already set C=0 now, since it will vanish then anyway.
Furthermore, we assume that at the surface z=η
the pressures are in equilibrium p0=p, leaving:
∂t∂Ψ+21((u(x))2+(u(z))2)+gη=0
This is called the free surface boundary condition.
Obviously, if z=η, then η−z=0.
Taking the material derivative
of this fact gives the following relation:
0=DtD(η−z)=∂t∂η+∂t∂z+u⋅∇η−u⋅∇z
Since η only depends on x and t,
this becomes the kinematic boundary condition:
∂t∂η+u(x)∂x∂η−u(z)=0
The equations will be derived from these two fundamental boundary conditions.
Boussinesq approximation
Let us take a Taylor expansion of the velocity potential Ψ(x,z,t)
at the bottom z=−h:
And so on for higher orders.
In the Taylor expansion, all even derivatives can be rewritten in this way,
and all odd derivatives can be split into a single ∂/∂z and an even x-derivative:
This result is exact for an inviscid incompressible fluid,
but once the Taylor series is truncated at a finite number of terms,
this is known as the Boussinesq approximation.
In effect, this removes all z-derivatives from the problem,
and will enable us to describe the surface dynamics
based on Ψ’s behaviour near the channel’s bottom.
This expression for Ψ gives the flow components,
where we define f(x,t)≡Ψx(x,−h,t)
as the value of u(x) at the bottom:
Now we must decide which terms to keep, i.e. where to truncate the expansion.
Let us therefore introduce the characteristic length scales η∼a and x∼λ,
and assume that the water is shallow compared to the waves’ length (λ≫h by a lot),
and that the waves’ amplitude is small compared to the channel’s depth (h≫a).
Specifically, we assume:
ha≫λh≫λa
We also introduce characteristic horizontal velocity scales u0 and f0
respectively at the surface and at the bottom.
Finally, let there be a characteristic time scale λ/u0 for the surface dynamics.
Inserting all these scales into the two boundary conditions yields:
Intuitively, we expect that u0≫f0, and this is indeed true:
from a linearization of this problem (given in the next section),
it turns out that f0/u0∼a/h and u0≈gh.
Multiplying the former equation by 1/u0
and the latter by λ/u02 this leads to:
The smallest term we will include is ah2/λ3;
anything smaller (specifically containing a2/λ2) will be discarded.
Of course, this decision is arbitrary:
higher-order approximations exist for deeper water and/or taller waves,
but we stick with Boussinesq’s original choice, leaving:
If we instead took λ to be even larger compared to h,
the right-hand sides of these equations would have vanished,
yielding a form of the so-called shallow water equations.
Single equation
We would like to combine these two equations into a single one for η,
but their nonlinear nature makes it hard to eliminate f directly.
To get around this, Boussinesq opted to make a lower-order version of these equations,
to use as a guide for some additional approximations
to help handle the higher-order version.
In the above discussion of the terms’ relative sizes,
let us instead choose a/λ as the highest order to include,
thereby reducing the equations to:
ηt+hfx=0ft+gηx=0
Respectively differentiating them with respect to t and x,
and then substituting fxt in the former using the latter,
we get Lagrange’s linear wave equation:
∂t2∂2η−gh∂x2∂2η=0
It is well-known that such a problem has a general solution
consisting of an arbitrary forward-moving part η+
and a backward-moving part η−,
both going at a constant velocity gh,
and neither of which change shape over time:
η(x,t)=η+(x−ght)+η−(x+ght)
Let us consider only forward-moving waves η(x−ght),
such that we can rewrite t-derivatives as x-derivatives with a factor −gh.
Our linearized free-surface equation thus becomes:
0=∂t∂η+h∂x∂f=−gh∂x∂η+h∂x∂f⟹f=hgη+C
The integration constant C can be removed by absorbing it into η.
Effectively, we have seen that, at least as a first-order approximation,
η is proportional to f.
Note that this analysis justifies our earlier assumption
that f0/u0∼a/h and u0≈gh.
Armed with this knowledge, we return
to the higher-order equations after some rearranging:
Clearly, the assumption of non-deforming waves η(x−ght)
was essential to get this equation.
But what if solving it yields a wave without that property?
Can it be trusted?
Fortunately yes: the first two terms (ηtt and ghηxx),
were not affected by that assumption (this is easy to see),
and the others are small according to the characteristic scales:
0∼λ2au02−ghλ2a−ghλ21(23ha2+3h2λ2a)
After dividing out a/λ,
we see that the last two terms are roughly a/λ and h3/λ3,
meaning they are much smaller than the first two,
which are both on the order of h/λ.
Dimensionless form
Let us non-dimensionalize the equation by introducing
dimensionless quantities η~, t~ and x~:
η~(x~,t~)=ηcη(x,t)t~=tctx~=xcx
Where ηc, tc and xc are unspecified scale parameters.
We rewrite the Boussinesq equation with these quantities
by using the chain rule of differentiation,
and divide by ηc/tc2:
Many authors flip the sign of η~x~x~x~x~
to get the so-called “good” Boussinesq equation
(as opposed to the “bad” one above).
For fluid surface waves, this is unphysical,
but it makes the problem more well-behaved mathematically;
the details are beyond the scope of this article.
Soliton solution
Let us make an ansatz for η~ that describes a wave
with a fixed shape propagating in the positive x~-direction
at dimensionless velocity v:
η~(x~,t~)=ϕ(ξ)ξ≡x~−vt~⟹∂t~∂=−v∂ξ∂∂x~∂=∂ξ∂
With this, the Boussinesq equation becomes a nonlinear ordinary differential equation:
0=(v2−1)ϕξξ−∂ξ2∂2(3ϕ2+ϕξξ)
We abbreviate w≡v2−1 and integrate twice,
introducing integration constants A and B:
wϕ−3ϕ2−ϕξξ=Aξ+B
We restrict ourselves to localized solutions
by demanding that ϕ→0 for ξ→±∞.
This implies that also ϕξ→0 and ϕξξ→0,
meaning that we must set A=B=0 to satisfy the equation at infinity.
The remaining terms are multiplied by ϕξ to give:
0=wϕϕξ−3ϕ2ϕξ−ϕξξϕξ=21∂ξ∂(wϕ2−2ϕ3−(ϕξ)2)
Integrating (and dropping the integration constant due to localization) yields:
(ϕξ)2=ϕ2(w−2ϕ)
Because ϕξ is real, we need the right-hand side to be positive,
so w>2ϕ; for ϕ→0, this means that w>0.
This equation is similar to the one encountered when solving
the Korteweg-de Vries equation
and is integrated in the same way; look there for details.
The result is:
η~(x~,t~)=2wsech2(2w(x~−1+wt~−x~0))
This is known as a soliton.
Reintroducing units by replacing η~=η/ηc etc.
leads to:
η(x,t)=whsech2(2h3w(x−(1+w)ght−x0))
Note that Boussinesq’s original calculation had (1+w/2) instead of 1+w;
the former is simply a first-order approximation of the latter.
Recall that gh is the phase velocity of Lagrange’s linear theory:
this shows that nonlinear waves are faster,
and speed up with amplitude.