Difference equations complementary solution

In this chapter, we develop analytical solution methods, which have very close analogs with methods used for linear ODEs. A few nonlinear difference equations can be reduced to linear form (the Riccati analog) and the analogous Euler-Equidimensional finite-difference equation also exists. For linear equations, we again exploit the property of superposition. Thus, our general solutions will be composed of a linear combination of complementary and particular solutions. 

It was stated at the outset that analytical methods for linear difference equations are quite similar to those applied to linear ODE. Thus, we first find the complementary solution to the homogeneous (unforced) equation, and then add the particular solution to this. We shall use the methods of Undetermined Coefficients and Inverse Operators to find particular solutions. 

Solution Methods for Linear Finite Difference Equations 167 5.2.1 Complementary Solutions... 

The multiparameter treatment of solvent effeets ean be criticized from at least three complementary points of view. First, the separation of solvent effects into various additive contributions is somewhat arbitrary, since different solute/solvent interaction mechanisms can cooperate in a non-independent way. Second, the choice of the best parameter for every type of solute/solvent interaction is critical because of the complexity of the corresponding empirieal solvent parameters, and because of their susceptibility to more than one of the multiple facets of solvent polarity. Third, in order to estabhsh a multiparameter regression equation in a statistically perfect way, so many experimental data points are usually necessary that there is often no room left for the prediction of solvent effects by extrapolation or interpolation. This helps to get a sound interpretation of the observed solvent effeet for the process under study, but simultaneously it limits the value of such multiparameter equations for the chemist in its daily laboratory work. 

Because the activities of species in the exchanger phase are not well defined in equation 2, a simplified model—that of an ideal mixture—is usually employed to calculate these activities according to the approach introduced bv Vanselow (20). Because of the approximate nature of this assumption and the fact that the mechanisms involved in ion exchange are influenced by factors (such as specific sorption) not represented by an ideal mixture, ion-exchange constants are strongly dependent on solution- and solid-phase characteristics. Thus, they are actually conditional equilibrium constants, more commonly referred to as selectivity coefficients. Both mole and equivalent fractions of cations have been used to represent the activities of species in the exchanger phase. Townsend (21) demonstrated that both the mole and equivalent fraction conventions are thermodynamically valid and that their use leads to solid-phase activity coefficients that differ but are entirely symmetrical and complementary. 

Another very important issue in this respect is the way to account for the surface conductivity. The formula of Bikerman (Equation 5.359), the correction factor to the electrophoretic mobility of Henry 3 (Equation 5.368), and the formula of O Brien and Hunter (Equation 5.371), quoted above are derived under the assumption that only the ions in the movable part (x > x Figure 5.67) of the EDL contribute to the surface conductivity, Xs- Moreover, the ions in the EDL are taken to have the same mobility as that in the bulk electrolyte solution. A variety of experimental data ° suggest, however, that the ions behind the shear plane (x < x ) and even those adsorbed in the Stem layer may contribute to Xs- Th term anomalous surface conductance was coined for this phenomenon. Such an effect can be taken into account theoretically, but new parameters (such as the ion mobility in the Stem layer) must be included in the consideration. Hence, the interpretation of data by these more complex models usually requires the application of two or more electrokinetic techniques which provide complementary information. Dukhin and van de Ven specify three major (and relatively simple) types of models as being most suitable for data interpretation. These models differ in the way they consider the surface conductivity and the connection between i and "Q. 

The linear combination mentioned in Theorem 3.3 is usually called the general, complementary, or homogeneous solution of Equation 3.10. The following theorem should help to clarify when equation 3.11 or Equation 3.12 is expected to be different from zero. 

This chapter has discussed the numerical solution of partial differential equations by the method of finite elements. For some problems this is a complementary method to the finite difference method of the previous chapter. For PDFs involving one spatial dimension and one time dimension, either of these approaches can usually be used to obtain accurate solutions. The finite element approach really shines when one has a PDE and boundary problem involving a non-rectangular spatial region. The more general spatial element allowed by the FE approach makes it easy to describe general spatial boundaries and boundary conditions associated with the boundaries. 

---