Numerical methods boundary-value problems

The weighted residual method provides a flexible mathematical framework for the construction of a variety of numerical solution schemes for the differential equations arising in engineering problems. In particular, as is shown in the followmg section, its application in conjunction with the finite element discretizations yields powerful solution algorithms for field problems. To outline this technique we consider a steady-state boundary value problem represented by the following mathematical model... 

The forward shooting method seems straightforward but is troublesome to use. What we have done is to convert a two-point boundary value problem into an easier-to-solve initial value problem. Unfortunately, the conversion gives a numerical computation that is ill-conditioned. Extreme precision is needed at the inlet of the tube to get reasonable accuracy at the outlet. The phenomenon is akin to problems that arise in the numerical inversion of matrices and Laplace transforms. 

Finite element methods are one of several approximate numerical techniques available for the solution of engineering boundary value problems. Analysis of materials processing operations lead to equations of this type, and finite element methods have a number of advantages in modeling such processes. This document is intended as an overview of this technique, to include examples relevant to polymer processing technology. 

At the same time it is worth to notice that in modern numerical methods of a solution of boundary value problems, based on replacement of differential equations by finite difference, these steps are performed simultaneously. In accordance with the theorem of uniqueness, the field inside the volume V is defined by a distribution of masses inside this volume and boundary conditions, and correspondingly it is natural to derive an equation establishing this link. With this purpose in mind we will again proceed from Gauss s theorem,... 

References Courant, R., and D. Hilbert, Methods of Mathematical Physics, vol. I, Interscience, New York (1953) Linz, P., Analytical and Numerical Methods for Volterra Equations, SIAM Publications, Philadelphia (1985) Porter, D., and D. S. G. Stirling, Integral Equations A Practical Treatment from Spectral Theory to Applications, Cambridge University Press (1990) Statgold, I., Greens Functions and Boundary Value Problems, 2d ed., Interscience, New York (1997). 

Other methods can be used in space, such as the finite element method, the orthogonal collocation method, or the method of orthogonal collocation on finite elements. One simply combines the methods for ordinary differential equations (see Ordinary Differential Equations—Boundary Value Problems ) with the methods for initial-value problems (see Numerical Solution of Ordinary Differential Equations as Initial Value Problems ). Fast Fourier transforms can also be used on regular grids (see Fast Fourier Transform ). 

Absorption columns can be modeled in a plate-to-plate fashion (even if it is a packed bed) or as a packed bed. The former model is a set of nonlinear algebraic equations, and the latter model is an ordinary differential equation. Since streams enter at both ends, the differential equation is a two-point boundary value problem, and numerical methods are used (see Numerical Solution of Ordinary Differential Equations as Initial-Value Problems ). 

Solution by Shooting Solution of the boundary value problem described by Eq. 6.59 is usually accomplished numerically by a shooting method. To implement a shooting method, the third-order equations is transformed to a system of three first-order equations as... 

A detailed treatment of the theoretical approach used in treating LSV and CV boundary value problems can be found in the monograph by MacDonald [23], More specific information on the numerical solution of integral equations common to electrochemical methods is available in the chapter by Nicholson [30]. The most commonly used method for the calculation of the theoretical electrochemical response, at the present time, is digital simulation which has been well reviewed by Feldberg [31, 32], Prater [33], Maloy [34], and Britz [35]. 

The first one is based on a classical variation method. This approach is also known as an indirect method as it focuses on obtaining the solution of the necessary conditions rather than solving the optimization directly. Solution of these conditions often results in a two-point boundary value problem (TPBVP), which is accepted that it is difficult to solve [15], Although several numerical techniques have been developed to address the solution of TPBVP, e.g. control vector iteration (CVI) and single/multiple shooting method, these methods are generally based on an iterative integration of the state and adjoint equations and are usually inefficient [16], Another difficulty relies on the fact that it requires an analytical differentiation to derive the necessary conditions. 

In terms of the concentration vector, Eq. (A10) is a nonlinear differential equation of the second order. The boundary-value problem [Eqs. (A10) and (All)] is usually solved numerically. However, it is also possible to linearize the reaction term using the method suggested in Ref. 181 ... 

Equations 1 through 6 can be solved numerically for temperature, pressure and concentration profiles along the length of the reactor, provided that the appropriate initial or boundary conditions are given. Solution methods are now discussed for both the initial and boundary value problems. However, emphasis will be placed on the latter since most industrial applications fall into this category. 

Keller, H. B. Numerical Methods for Two-Point Boundary-Value Problems, Blaisdell, New York (1972). 

Electromagnetic potential equations and boundary conditions Another approach to the formulation of electromagnetic boundary-value problem is to use the electromagnetic potentials introduced in Chapter 8. This approach has been used in a number of publications on numerical electromagnetic methods (Biro and Preis, 1990 Everett and Schultz, 1996 Everett, 1999 Haber et aJ., 1999). 

There are many studies that imply numerical methods for the forward modelling of galvanic corrosion problem. These techniques are based mainly on boundary value problems (B VP) formulations in order to obtain or verify results, such as finite element method (FEM), finite difference method (FDM) or boundary element method (BEM). These methods are successfully used and showed to be very accurate to solve BVPs. Some of them are also implemented in commercial software. 

The two-point boundary value problem for the effective potential (11)—(16) was solved numerically, by using the shooting methods [32], The computations were performed for the following range of parameters r = T / I], = 0.08 —... 

Two methods are available for the numerical solution of initial-boundary-value problems, the finite difference method and the finite element method. Finite difference methods are easy to handle and require little mathematical effort. In contrast the finite element method, which is principally applied in solid and structure mechanics, has much higher mathematical demands, it is however very flexible. In particular, for complicated geometries it can be well suited to the problem, and for such cases should always be used in preference to the finite difference method. We will limit ourselves to an introductory illustration of the difference method, which can be recommended even to beginners as a good tool for solving heat conduction problems. The application of the finite element method to these problems has been described in detail by G.E. Myers [2.52]. Further information can be found in D. Marsal [2.53] and in the standard works [2.54] to [2.56]. 

The number of boundary conditions both for the left and the right second-order parabolic boundary-value problems (3.106) is sufficient to uniquely solve them by any numerical finite difference method, provided they are supplied by an additional condition on the interface at each vertical cross section x, TE(x, 1) = TEh However, the left and right solutions do not obviously give the equal derivatives on the interface z = 1. Therefore, the second conjugation condition (3.107) becomes a one-variable transcendental equation for choosing the proper value of TEh. The conjugation problems (3.106), (3.107) and (3.85) - (3.87) have computationally been treated in a similar manner. 

First of all, the method of numerical treatment needs a modification. In the case where each of the physical processes acts independently, the corresponding conjugation boundary-value problems led to one transcendental equation with one unknown. It was natural to expect that, from the physical meaning of the problem, the last equation admits a unique solution. 

---