J4James

355 Reputation

12 Badges

11 years, 333 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by J4James

You made it very clear but what will be the possible staring point to handle the situation?

@PatrickT, I tried to follow ur suggestions but no luck.

1. complex=false

 dsolve(subs(para,epsilon=1.6, {bc, eq1, eq2}), numeric,complex=false):
Error, (in dsolve/numeric/bvp) bvp keyword was complex, optional keyword must be
 one of 'output', 'value', 'range', 'abserr', 'maxmesh', 'initmesh','continuation', 'mincont', 
'approxsoln', 'adaptive', 'interpolant', 'optimize'

 2. Re

eq1:=Re(n*(-diff(f(eta),eta$2))^(n-1)*diff(f(eta),eta$3))+(2*n/(n+1))*f(eta)*

diff(f(eta),eta$2)-diff(f(eta),eta$1)^2-M*diff(f(eta),eta$1)+M*epsilon+epsilon^2+

lambda*theta(eta)=0;

eq2:=remain the same with bcs;

dsolve(subs(para,epsilon=1.6, {bc, eq1, eq2}), numeric):
Error, (in fproc) unable to store 'HFloat(0.251188643150958)*
RootOf(2000000000*Re(_Z)-HFloat(6.5e10))' when datatype=float[8]
 
Thanks

@PatrickT, I tried to follow ur suggestions but no luck.

1. complex=false

 dsolve(subs(para,epsilon=1.6, {bc, eq1, eq2}), numeric,complex=false):
Error, (in dsolve/numeric/bvp) bvp keyword was complex, optional keyword must be
 one of 'output', 'value', 'range', 'abserr', 'maxmesh', 'initmesh','continuation', 'mincont', 
'approxsoln', 'adaptive', 'interpolant', 'optimize'

 2. Re

eq1:=Re(n*(-diff(f(eta),eta$2))^(n-1)*diff(f(eta),eta$3))+(2*n/(n+1))*f(eta)*

diff(f(eta),eta$2)-diff(f(eta),eta$1)^2-M*diff(f(eta),eta$1)+M*epsilon+epsilon^2+

lambda*theta(eta)=0;

eq2:=remain the same with bcs;

dsolve(subs(para,epsilon=1.6, {bc, eq1, eq2}), numeric):
Error, (in fproc) unable to store 'HFloat(0.251188643150958)*
RootOf(2000000000*Re(_Z)-HFloat(6.5e10))' when datatype=float[8]
 
Thanks

@Preben Alsholm thanks for your explanation.

The system is exactly the one for which I need a solution. You can see the attached research

paper Magnetohydrodynamic_.pdf, where they give the solution of exactly the same equation (eq1).

Infact, I adopted the eq1 from there including one extra term which I needed for my model. 

As you rightly mentioned that,  "if diff(f(eta),eta,eta) is real and positive then (-diff(f(eta),eta$2))^(n-1) is imaginary". What I am thinking is that can we consider the real part and find the solution?

How we will do it in Maple?

Thanks 

@Preben Alsholm thanks for your explanation.

The system is exactly the one for which I need a solution. You can see the attached research

paper Magnetohydrodynamic_.pdf, where they give the solution of exactly the same equation (eq1).

Infact, I adopted the eq1 from there including one extra term which I needed for my model. 

As you rightly mentioned that,  "if diff(f(eta),eta,eta) is real and positive then (-diff(f(eta),eta$2))^(n-1) is imaginary". What I am thinking is that can we consider the real part and find the solution?

How we will do it in Maple?

Thanks 

I am not sure about it but here is the thing

Its an initial condition of that particular type "D(f)(0)=beta/(1-phi)^(2.5)*(D@D)(f)(0)".

When I try to solve the ode I do not need to specify (D@D)(f)(0) to get the

desired results. 

bc:=f(0)=0,D(f)(0)=beta/(1-phi)^(2.5)*(D@D)(f)(0),D(f)(N)=1;

N:=5:beta:=1:M:=1:phi:=0.1:

d:=dsolve({eq1,bc},numeric,output=array([seq( 0.01*i, i=0..100*N)])):

d1:=odeplot(d, [[eta,diff(f(eta),eta), color=red]],0..N):

display(d1);

One thing more M must be +ve, the same is for beta, M belongs to [0, 3].

I am not sure about it but here is the thing

Its an initial condition of that particular type "D(f)(0)=beta/(1-phi)^(2.5)*(D@D)(f)(0)".

When I try to solve the ode I do not need to specify (D@D)(f)(0) to get the

desired results. 

bc:=f(0)=0,D(f)(0)=beta/(1-phi)^(2.5)*(D@D)(f)(0),D(f)(N)=1;

N:=5:beta:=1:M:=1:phi:=0.1:

d:=dsolve({eq1,bc},numeric,output=array([seq( 0.01*i, i=0..100*N)])):

d1:=odeplot(d, [[eta,diff(f(eta),eta), color=red]],0..N):

display(d1);

One thing more M must be +ve, the same is for beta, M belongs to [0, 3].

@Joe Riel

One thing more, I am trying to get the data in .txt file for the four plots using this inside the loop

MM[M]:=

<IQ|DT>;

ExportMatrix("C:/data.txt", MM[M]):
But i just get data for one plot. How to do it for four of them.

@Joe Riel

One thing more, I am trying to get the data in .txt file for the four plots using this inside the loop

MM[M]:=

<IQ|DT>;

ExportMatrix("C:/data.txt", MM[M]):
But i just get data for one plot. How to do it for four of them.

Thanks @Joe Riel, it worked. But how to use different colors for the different output.

Thanks @Joe Riel, it worked. But how to use different colors for the different output.

Well, thanks guys (@Preben Alsholm & @herclau) for your helpful suggestions.

Actually, I am looking for some thing/example which clearly show me

the change in %. Some numerical/graphical thing/example, where we can see the

change.

Thanks

Well, thanks guys (@Preben Alsholm & @herclau) for your helpful suggestions.

Actually, I am looking for some thing/example which clearly show me

the change in %. Some numerical/graphical thing/example, where we can see the

change.

Thanks

It seems that Maple's numerical method for solving boundary-value problems

can only return one solution at a time. Therefore, when lambda < roughly -1,

it can only give you the value of -theta'(0) corresponding to the "lower branch solution" ,

because that is the solution to which the numerical solver has converged.

I think most simple methods are iterative; it may then be possible to give it an initial guess

for the solution and by choosing that guess carefully to converge on the upper rather than

the lower-branch solution.

For this purpose I have simplified the problem under consideration and converted it into IVP

restart:
with(plots):
eq1:= diff(f(eta), eta, eta, eta)+f(eta)*(diff(f(eta), eta, eta))-(diff(f(eta), eta))^2
+1+k*(f(eta)^2*(diff(f(eta), eta, eta, eta))-2*f(eta)*(diff(f(eta), eta))*(diff(f(eta), 
eta, eta))) = 0;
eq2:=diff(theta(eta), eta$2)+pr*f(eta)*diff(theta(eta), eta$1)=0;
respar:=dsolve({eq1,eq2,f(0)=s,D(f)(0)=lambda,theta(0)=1,(D@D)(f)(0)=f2/(1+k),
D(theta)(0)=-f3},numeric,output=listprocedure,parameters=[k,pr,s,lambda,f2,f3]);

X1,X2,F,F1,F2:=op(subs(respar,[theta(eta),diff(theta(eta),eta),f(eta),diff(f(eta),eta),

diff(f(eta),eta,eta)]));

p := proc (N,k,pr,s,lambda,f2,f3) if not type([args], list(numeric)) then return

'procname(args)' end if; respar(parameters = [k,pr,s,lambda,f2,f3]); X1(N): F1(N)-1

end proc;

implicitplot(p(4, 0.5, 0.7, 0.5,lambda, 3.142141596,f3) =0, lambda=-1.75..0,

f3 = 0..7, grid = [35, 35], gridrefine = 2, resolution = 1000, crossingrefine = 3,

color = black);

But as you can see, the output does not make any sense.

Thanks

 



The idea is to plot the expression in F3 vs x=0..1.

For y we can use output = array([seq(0.1e-1*i, i = -110 .. 110)]).

But I can not make it happen.

Thanks

First 16 17 18 19 20 21 Page 18 of 21