# direct and iterative solution

 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 May 7, 2004, 19:00 direct and iterative solution #1 subhra Guest   Posts: n/a Is there a reason that a direct method (e.g. cyclic reduction) can be less accurate than ADI in solving the linear algebraic equations from a separable elliptic differential equation (whose exact analytical solution is used in calculating the error).. e.g. the larger operation cound and matrix conditioning issues affecting the round-off error in cyclic reduction and offsetting the advantage of having no iterative convergence error... Can this observation, my observations on compiler dependence and architecture dependence in previous messages in this forum stem from a bug in programming my code.. Incidentally I am using a fishpack subroutine for cyclic reduction (I don't understand CR to the degree of coding it) from : http://www.scd.ucar.edu/css/software/fishpack/

 May 8, 2004, 23:15 Re: direct and iterative solution #2 Ananda Himansu Guest   Posts: n/a As you speculate, direct methods can indeed have larger roundoff errors than iterative methods. Often, the diagonal dominance of the effective iteration matrix of an iterative method is better than that of the matrix being directly solved. Also, the iterative method involves fewer arithmetic operations. Therefore, the iterative method upon being sufficiently converged, can yield a solution with less roundoff error than the direct method. With either method, you can improve the solution by the technique of iterative improvement, where the system is put in the so-called delta form, with the residual vector as the right-hand side. Of course, this residual vector must be computed using higher-precision arithmetic. As an aside, given the floating-point architecture of modern cpus, it costs you more clock cycles to do 32-bit floating point computations than to do 64-bit ones. You should note that it is incorrect to use the exact analytical solution to the differential equation to calculate the numerical error in order to draw any conclusions about roundoff or iterative convergence error levels. You must use the exact solution to the discretized equations, which of course begs the question of how you should obtain it. In general, you can only use a better approximation to the exact discrete solution, perhaps from a 128-bit precision calculation. As an alternative you can create an exact solution yourself (perhaps the exact analytical solution you have right now), but you must then create a modified system of discretized equations by subjecting that exact solution to the discretized differential operator. This will yield a non-zero source term in your discretized system, representing the discretization error of the discrete operator.

 May 9, 2004, 01:23 Re: direct and iterative solution #3 subhra Guest   Posts: n/a Thanks for the excellent explanation.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post bill Main CFD Forum 16 November 5, 2014 08:18 dearboy Main CFD Forum 5 November 29, 2010 10:18 Louis Le Grange OpenFOAM 0 October 5, 2009 10:53 wuliang Main CFD Forum 2 January 13, 2003 23:28 Praveen C. Main CFD Forum 1 December 14, 1999 10:35

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:26.