Philip Roe
• Member for 4 years, 9 months
• Last seen this week

The basic difference is simply the meaning to be attached to the results. FDM predicts point values of any aspect of the solution. Interpolation between these values is often left to the imagination ...

There is something very basic that you should know about hyperbolic problems. Consider the most basic example $\partial_tu+a\partial_xu=0$ with a numerical marching scheme of the form $$u_j^{n+1}=\... View answer 4 votes I dont think there is a universal answer. In a computer science or math department you might get caught up in oversimplified problems about which you can prove things but which lack the complexity of "... View answer 4 votes You stumbled across something very fundamental that is important to understand. For any PDE we can define for each point its "domain of dependence" This is the region of space/time that is able to ... View answer Accepted answer 4 votes Physically, vorticity can only be created (as opposed to transported, stretched or intensified after being created) either by the appearance of a boundary layer on a solid surface, or through the ... View answer 3 votes I want to support the response from @Pseudonym, who makes the point that not everyone in the team needs to contribute to every aspect of the project. Something related to consider is that you are ... View answer 3 votes My old answer has been edited in a way that I cannot agree with, but AG took such care to type everything out that Ill start again. This is a very old difficulty and the best textbook is Strang and ... View answer 2 votes User 03161 asserts that the Crank Nicolson method is not appropriate for advection problems, but boyfarrell provides a working code with results visualized in a movie. In fact they are both correct, ... View answer Accepted answer 2 votes There is really no such thing as a good finite difference equivalent to an operator. In the earliest days of scientific computing, the thought was that each differential operator would be replaced by ... View answer Accepted answer 2 votes Upwinding is not necessary. The best known and most-used limited central scheme is Nessyahu-Tadmor Nessyahu, H. and Tadmor, E., 1990. Non-oscillatory central differencing for hyperbolic conservation ... View answer Accepted answer 2 votes The expression with g=1/2 is second order if and only if f is the midpoint of P and N.The expression with g\in[0,1] is second order if f is on PN andfN/Pf=g. If f is anywhere else you need to ... View answer Accepted answer 2 votes Your calculation is fine. You have discovered data u(x,0)=\cos(kt) whose solution becomes unbounded. Now consider initial v(x) having unit initial norm and combine them into initial data$$U(x,0)=...

You may want a method that works right down to the coordinate singularity at $r=0$. I will do the spherical case, but the cylindrical case is similar. We want to avoid ever dividing by $r$. To think ...

This is made a lot easier by introducing the Calculus of Finite Differences. If $u_{i,j}$ is grid function defined for integer $i,j$ then the y-differencing operator $$\delta_y u=u_{j+1}-u_j$$ is ...

This is a bit primitive, but has a good chance to work. Plot $I$ versus $1/t$. Fit a smooth curve and find the intercept. This works a lot better if you have some theory predicting the behavior of $I$...

Most FM methods require that we can identify pairs of adjacent elements. This is easy with elements derived from a quadrilateral/hexahedral grid that can be mapped onto an array structure. To deal ...

I once worked on this for a bit. It makes a big difference where your data comes from. Typically it will contain errors from experimental data, or is quoted only with finite precision. In such cases ...

The most fundamental reason is that (static) structural problems often resolve themselves into finding minimum energy configurations and this is easily translated into minimizing the energy of a FE ...

In your sketch, you are having 9 grid points so you could have fit all 9 values to a 2-D cubic polynomial. Then the Taylor series expansion becomes $(I)\qquad f(x+b,y+d)\approx f + b f_x+d f_y +\frac{... View answer Accepted answer 1 votes Im not sure there is a rigorous justification, but consider that stability is defined (should be defined) in the following way. That the numerical solution remains bounded as the mesh sizes in time ... View answer 1 votes There is a graphical version of this method (Richardson extrapolation) that can be very insightful. Use least three values of$h$, not necessarily different by factors of two or any other simple ... View answer 0 votes Since any two non-parallel lines must intersect somewhere (according to Euclid) I imagine that the OP intended a slightly different question. For example, do the rays intersect within the convex hull ... View answer 0 votes One approach is via the equivalent equation, that is, the differential equation to which your discrete method gives the closest aproximation. This is never the differential equation that you intended ... View answer 0 votes You can only expect to get a sensible answer if your data can be resolved by the grid. Shannons Sampling Theorem is central to all digital signal processing and states that no signal with wavelength ... View answer 0 votes In research and teaching, mostly use dimensionless equations. A neat way in aerodynamics is to put the free stream values as$p=1, U=M, \rho=\gamma$(so that$a=1\$) But if you are designing something ...

This question opens a can of worms, as is made evident by the variety of answers given. Many of these make useful points, but a really helpful answer would take account of considerations that have not ...