Stability Runge-Kutta method

These Runge-Kutta methods do not require information from the past, and are very versatile if the time steps need to be adjusted as the solution evolves. The stability of the RK2 is similar to the APC2, while the RK4 has less strong conditions for stability [10]. Both are ideal for initial value problems in time or in space,... 

The method is one way to handle a stiff set of odes, and is an extension of fourth-order explicit Runge-Kutta. The function to be solved is approximated over the next time interval by a combination of a linear function of the dependent variable and a quadratic function of time (assuming that it is strongly time-dependent) and this increases the accuracy and stability of the fourth-order Runge-Kutta method considerably. Today, however, we have other methods of dealing with stiff sets of odes, so this method might be said to have outlived its usefulness. 

The standard Euler methods and Runge-Kutta methods do not converge for stiff ODE S. A still system can be defined as one in which the stability of the numerical methods used becomes an issue. Maple has an inbuilt stiff solver. 

This is a second-order Runge-Kutta method (Finlayson, 1980), sometimes called the midpoint rule. The first step is an approximation of the solution halfway between the beginning and ending time, and the second step evaluates the right-hand side at that mid-point. The error goes as (At), which is much smaller than that achieved with the Euler method. The second-order Runge-Kutta methods (there are several) also have a stability limitation. 

By selecting a time step that is suitably small, appropriate accuracy and stability can be achieved. In two- and three-Cartesian dimensions, these difference equations are separable in position, velocity, and acceleration. Runge-Kutta methods (or other) can be used for more accuracy at larger time steps. When collisions occur, momentum and center of mass are used for additional solution constraints. To make this all more tangible, weTl look at some specific systems. 

Among explicit symplectic Partitioned Runge-Kutta methods this is the maximum stability threshold [74]. In a similar way one can analyze the stability of the Verlet and other methods and one thus obtains conditions on the stepsize that must hold for the equilibrium points to be stable in the linearization. Analyzing the stability of both continuous and discrete iteration is much more compUcated for... 

Applying a Runge-Kutta method to such a linear system allows direct determination of the stability condition. For example, Euler s method would yield... 

The three-dimensional unsteady compressible Navier-Stokes equations are solved based on a large-eddy simulation (LES) using the MILES (monotone integrated LES) approach [4]. The vertex-centered finite-volume flow solver is block-structured. A modified advection-upstream-splitting method (AUSM) is used for the Euler terms [16] which are discretized to second-order accuracy by an upwind-biased approximation. For the non-Euler terms a centered approximation of second-order is used. The temporal integration from time level n to n- -1 is done by a second-order accurate explicit 5-stage Runge-Kutta method, the coefficients of which are optimized for maximum stability. For a detailed description of the flow solver the reader is referred to Meinke et al. [18]. 

Dekker, K., Verver, J.G. Stability of Runge-Kutta Methods for Stiff Nonlinear Differential Eqnations. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1984)... 

In ref. 164 the authors consider a new BDF fourth-order method for solving stiff initial-value problems, based on Chebyshev approximation. The authors prove that the developed method may be presented as a Runge-Kutta method having stage order four. They examine the stability properties of the method and they presented a strategy for changing the step size based on embedded pair of the Runge-Kutta schemes. 

Similar to the discussion in the multistep case we investigate the stability of Runge-Kutta methods for finite step sizes h by considering the linear test equation x = x, cf. (4.1.19). 

The function i (C —> (P is called stability function of the Runge-Kutta method, cf. the definition of for multistep methods Sec. 4.1.4. 

As R 0) = 1, all Runge-Kutta methods are zero stable. This fact is also reflected in Fig. 4.6, where the origin is located at the stability boundary, see Sec. 4.1.4. 

The main reason for using implicit Runge-Kutta methods is due the excellent stability properties of some of the methods in this class. Again, we consider stability for the linear test equation and obtain by applying (4.3.3)... 

Often, the term stiff differential equation is used to indicate that special methods are used for numerically solving them. These methods are called stiff integrators and are characterized by A-stability or at least i4(a)-stability. They are always implicit and require a corrector iteration based on Newton s method. For example BDF methods or some implicit Runge-Kutta methods, like the Radau method are stiff integrators in that sense. 

Stability of Implicit Runge-Kutta Methods for DAEs... 

All the methods presented so far, e.g. the Euler and the Runge-Kutta methods, are examples of explicit methods, as the numerical solution aty +i has an explicit formula. Explicit methods, however, have problems with stability, and there are certain stability constraints that prevent the explicit methods from taking very large time steps. Stability analysis can be used to show that the explicit Euler method is conditionally stable, i.e. the step size has to be chosen sufficiently small to ensure stability. This conditional stability, i.e. the existence of a critical step size beyond which numerical instabilities manifest, is typical for all explicit methods. In contrast, the implicit methods have much better stability properties. Let us introduce the implicit backward Euler method. 

Higher order Runge-Kutta methods have a better stability range than Euler s integration technique. 

---