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

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?
Post a Comment
Read more

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...
Post a Comment
Read more