Skip to main content

differential equations - Accuracy of Grad-Shafranov PDE's NDSolveValue over implicit region


Context




I need to solve for the toroidal flux of the magnetic field above an accretion disc.



For this purpose, I define the region over which the flux is non zero,


a= 2;
f[R_] = a (1 - R^2)^(1/2 + 1/100);
Ω = ImplicitRegion[z <= f[R], {{R, 0, 1}, {z, 0, f[0]}}];

Mathematica graphics


Then I solve for the force-free Grad-Shafranov equation:



eqn0 =R D[P[R, z], {R, 2}] + R D[P[R, z], {z, 2}] - D[P[R, z], R] == -R/2;

as follows


P0 = NDSolveValue[{eqn0, DirichletCondition[P[R, z] == 0, R == 0], 
    DirichletCondition[P[R, z] == 0, z == f[R]]},  P, {R, z} ∈ Ω];

I then plot the resulting (normalized) flux map:


np = NMaximize[P0[R, z], {R, z} ∈ Ω][[1]];
ContourPlot[ P0[R, z]/np, {R, z} ∈ Ω,PlotPoints -> 50, 
ImageSize -> Small, AspectRatio -> Sqrt[f[0]]]


Mathematica graphics


and look at the value of the flux on the boundary


Plot[P0[R, z]/np /. z -> f[R], {R, 0, 1}, PlotRange -> All]

Mathematica graphics


it seems to satisfy the boundary condition.


If I now look at the pressure above the cap:


grad2 = Grad[P0[R, z]/np, {R, z}] // (#.#/R^2 &);
Plot[grad2 /. z -> f[R], {R, 0, 1}]


Mathematica graphics


It is not smooth enough…


On top of that


If I decide to extend the height of the column over which the flux is defined, to say


 a=15;

Then the accuracy of he map deteriorates considerably for the map


Mathematica graphics


and even more for the pressure:



Mathematica graphics


QUESTION(S)



How can improve the accuracy of the solution found by NDSolveValue?



I understand that there are options such as PrecisionGoal or Method, but I guess I am trying to ask a more general question:



More generally, what is the best learning strategy within mathematica to be able to find such improvement? (a.k.a how not to get lost in the documentation?). The idea being, next time I can figure this myself :-)



Mathematica gives the following warning, which is undoubtedly a hint



NDSolveValue::femcscd: The PDE is convection dominated and the result may not be stable. Adding artificial diffusion may help.


but I do not know how to follow it up.


PS: If, instead of


 f[R_] = a (1 - R^2)^(1/2 + 1/100);

I have


f[R_] = a (1 - R^2)^(1/2);

the integrator also fails miserably, which is rather odd.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

list manipulation - Selecting multiple columns from a matrix?

Sample data: data = { {{2013, 1, 1}, 24.13, 167.67, 231.82}, {{2013, 1, 2}, 32.15, 170.92, 225.99}, {{2013, 1, 3}, 35.43, 172.68, 221.67}, {{2013, 1, 4}, 36.73, 173.05, 218.32}, {{2013, 1, 5}, 58.19, 165.96, 197.05}, {{2013, 1, 6}, 69.99, 163.50, 187.52}, {{2013, 1, 7}, 71.37, 154.21, 175.58}, {{2013, 1, 8}, 72.51, 149.66, 163.25}}; I want a DateListPlot with three graphs, so for a matrix formed by columns 1 and 2, one for columns 1 and 3, and 1 for columns 1 and 4. At the moment I'm using this code: data2 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 2]]}]; data3 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 3]]}]; data4 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 4]]}]; DateListPlot[{data2, data3, data4}, Joined -> True, Filling -> {3 -> {1}}] but I have a hunch that this can be done more efficiently. I don't like the Transpose s in particular. Any ideas? edit (for extra credit) What if I need to multiply the second column by 2, which in my solution is simp...
Post a Comment
Read more

calculus and analysis - Integral of the Sinc product

Let us consider the following integral $$ B_n = \int_0^\infty \prod_{k=1,3,5,\dots}^n\frac{\sin (x/k)}{x/k}dx $$ By definition, Sinc[x] == Sin[x]/x , therefore B[n_?OddQ] := Integrate[Product[Sinc[x/k], {k, 1, n, 2}], {x, 0, Infinity}] B /@ Range[1, 13, 2] {Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2} OK, everything is fine. But... B[15] 467807924713440738696537864469 Pi/935615849440640907310521750000 What's going on? Answer As Eckhard wrote in comments B[n] is the n-th Borwein integral . (The letter B was not accidental :) ) This funny properties of Borwein integrals is related to the Fourier transform of Sinc function FourierTransform[Sinc[x], x, k] 1/2 Sqrt[Pi/2] (Sign[1 - k] + Sign[1 + k]) Plot[%, {k, -2, 2}, Filling -> 0] which is the box function. The result is $\pi/2$ while the sum $$ 1/3+1/5+\dots+1/n $$ B_n = \frac{\pi}{2} - \pi \bigg(\sum_{k=3,5,\ldots}^n\frac{1}{k} -1\biggr)^\frac{n-1}{2}\prod_{k=3,5,\dots}^n\frac{k}{k-1}. $$ For $n=15$ it is equal to $$ \frac{46780...
Post a Comment
Read more