|
[Sponsors] | |||||
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
I have written a little program to solve an ordinary dfferential equation. The user can decide whether an explicit or implicit integration method is used. Looking on the results, I cannot see any advantage of the implicit scheme. What do you think about it? The mathematical bakground was: IMPLICIT: f(t+Dt) = f(t) + Dt* df/dt|_(t+Dt) EXPLICIT: f(t+Dt) = f(t) + Dt* df/dt|_(t) |
|
|
||
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Try using f(t+Dt) = f(t) + 0.5*Dt*( df/dt|_(t+Dt) + df/dt|_(t) )
and vary the timestep comparing the results. For an ode you'd should really look at explicit Runge-Kutta methods rather than your forward Euler step. |
|
|
||
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
One way of looking at it is that if f(t) is mass say and therefore df/dt is mass flow, what happens if Dt*df/dt(t) is negative and higher in magnitude than f(t)?
In the explicit scheme you'll get negative mass (bad!). In the implicit scheme the iterated estimate of df/dt(t+Dt) will prevent the negative mass. Explicit schemes assume that the grients at (t) are constant through the step. Implicit ones don't. Explicit schemes require small steps because of this. |
|
|
||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Implicit versus Explicit | Deepak | Main CFD Forum | 17 | November 7, 2015 14:14 |
| Implicit or explicit ? | Rickard.Solsjo | OpenFOAM | 0 | May 31, 2011 05:02 |
| ddt explicit or implicit with courant number!! | mrshb4 | OpenFOAM | 0 | December 13, 2010 12:13 |
| From Explicit to Implicit formulation | emanuele | FLUENT | 2 | October 4, 2006 15:17 |
| Euler (explicit or implicit) | anybody | Main CFD Forum | 2 | May 8, 2006 03:12 |