Get Help

Turn on suggestions

Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

- Community
- :
- PTC Mathcad
- :
- PTC Mathcad
- :
- Solving a stiff (?) ode

Options

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page

Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

03-06-2016
04:28 PM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-06-2016
04:28 PM

Solving a stiff (?) ode

I have an old (10+ years) worksheet in which I solved an apparently stiff ode using Bulstoer (without using the Jacobian). Having a reason to resuscitate the worksheet I tried rewriting it using Odesolve, which worked for loading but not for unloading (look at worksheet to see what this means). Trying the different solvers in Odesolve did not help. Can someone give me some insight into what is going on? Maybe I was just smarter 10+ years ago, but I do not think I would have hit upon using Bulstoer if I had to do it over again.

Solved! Go to Solution.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

03-09-2016
04:20 PM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-09-2016
04:20 PM

John Rudnicki wrote:

Thanks, but I did not understand a comment in your worksheet.

.

Ignore my comment - I misinterpreted Zu!!

And maybe my question was unclear. The result I get with Bulstoer was what I expected for this problem. But my question was more why I cannot get the same result with Odesolve since now (as opposed to 10 years ago) I never would have thought to use Bulstoer.

.

In a way you were lucky to get a result with Bulstoer. If you'd tried to use npointsu = 200, for example, it would have failed. There are numerical issues related to rapid gradients. This is also true of Odesolve. My version works with Radau, but not Adams/BDF unless I change the number of points!

Alan

4 REPLIES 4

03-09-2016
03:58 AM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-09-2016
03:53 PM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-09-2016
03:53 PM

Thanks, but I did not understand a comment in your worksheet.

And maybe my question was unclear. The result I get with Bulstoer was what I expected for this problem. But my question was more why I cannot get the same result with Odesolve since now (as opposed to 10 years ago) I never would have thought to use Bulstoer.

.

03-09-2016
04:20 PM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-09-2016
04:20 PM

John Rudnicki wrote:

Thanks, but I did not understand a comment in your worksheet.

.

Ignore my comment - I misinterpreted Zu!!

And maybe my question was unclear. The result I get with Bulstoer was what I expected for this problem. But my question was more why I cannot get the same result with Odesolve since now (as opposed to 10 years ago) I never would have thought to use Bulstoer.

.

In a way you were lucky to get a result with Bulstoer. If you'd tried to use npointsu = 200, for example, it would have failed. There are numerical issues related to rapid gradients. This is also true of Odesolve. My version works with Radau, but not Adams/BDF unless I change the number of points!

Alan

03-09-2016
05:00 PM

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

03-09-2016
05:00 PM

Thanks. Good to be lucky - I thought it was just more evidence that I was smarter 10 years ago.