2
$\begingroup$

I want to numerically integrate the equation $\partial_t u= a(t) \partial_xu+b\partial_{xxx}u+c$ to get $u(t)$. Is is preferable to use a difference formula of higher order of accuracy for spatial derivatives? Thanks. I am using a Semi-Discretization method called Method of Lines (vertical) to treat this problem.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Could you tell us more about the problem - what is the domain, etc.? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 3, 2012 at 1:40
  • $\begingroup$ hi, @tom-dickens it is a equation resulting from fluid dynamics. $\endgroup$
    – gstar2002
    Commented Oct 4, 2012 at 15:25

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

You could use the method of lines to solve this PDE. If you use an explicit finite difference method, you will need to take a rather small time step (${\mathcal O(\Delta x^3))}$ due to the $u_{xxx}$ term.

Given that you don't specify any boundary conditions, I will assume that you are solving the Cauchy problem. In that case (or in case of periodic boundary conditions), there is a much more efficient approach. Since your PDE is linear and the coefficients don't vary in space, you can solve in terms of Fourier modes. Decompose the initial data as usual:

$$u(x,0) = \sum_k c_k\exp{ikx}.$$

Then use the ansatz

$$u(x,0) = \sum_k g_k(t)\exp{ikx}$$

with $g_k(0) = c_k$. Substituting this in your PDE gives

$$g_k'(t) = ik a(t) - ik^3b + c.$$

This can be solved very easily by numerical quadrature (or exactly, if $a(t)$ can be integrated symbolically).

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks David. I decided to use MOL to solve the problem. But I will try to use the Fourier method, if I have one more chance. $\endgroup$
    – gstar2002
    Commented Oct 29, 2012 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ The acture system is more complicated, but I think the Fourier method is applicable. $\endgroup$
    – gstar2002
    Commented Oct 29, 2012 at 20:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .