Processing math: 100%
Research article

A fast second-order block-centered finite difference method for the fractional Cattaneo equation

  • Received: 27 March 2025 Revised: 01 June 2025 Accepted: 06 June 2025 Published: 19 June 2025
  • MSC : 65N06, 65N15

  • In this paper, a fast second-order block-centered finite difference method based on the FL2-1σ formula and a weighted approach was proposed for the time fractional Cattaneo equation. Using the special properties of the discrete coefficients and mathematical induction method, we derived the unconditional stability and convergence of the method rigorously. Second-order superconvergence in time and space for the velocity and pressure in discrete L(L2)-norms was established on non-uniform rectangular grids. Numerical examples were provided to verify our theoretical results.

    Citation: Xianqiang Zhang. A fast second-order block-centered finite difference method for the fractional Cattaneo equation[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(6): 14196-14221. doi: 10.3934/math.2025640

    Related Papers:

    [1] Şuayip Toprakseven, Seza Dinibutun . A high-order stabilizer-free weak Galerkin finite element method on nonuniform time meshes for subdiffusion problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31022-31049. doi: 10.3934/math.20231588
    [2] A.S. Hendy, R.H. De Staelen, A.A. Aldraiweesh, M.A. Zaky . High order approximation scheme for a fractional order coupled system describing the dynamics of rotating two-component Bose-Einstein condensates. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 22766-22788. doi: 10.3934/math.20231160
    [3] Jinghong Liu . $ W^{1, \infty} $-seminorm superconvergence of the block finite element method for the five-dimensional Poisson equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31092-31103. doi: 10.3934/math.20231591
    [4] Mubashara Wali, Sadia Arshad, Sayed M Eldin, Imran Siddique . Numerical approximation of Atangana-Baleanu Caputo derivative for space-time fractional diffusion equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15129-15147. doi: 10.3934/math.2023772
    [5] Kaifang Liu, Lunji Song . A family of interior-penalized weak Galerkin methods for second-order elliptic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 500-517. doi: 10.3934/math.2021030
    [6] Jinghong Liu, Qiyong Li . Pointwise superconvergence of block finite elements for the three-dimensional variable coefficient elliptic equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28611-28622. doi: 10.3934/math.20241388
    [7] Yang Liu, Enyu Fan, Baoli Yin, Hong Li . Fast algorithm based on the novel approximation formula for the Caputo-Fabrizio fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 1729-1744. doi: 10.3934/math.2020117
    [8] A. K. Omran, V. G. Pimenov . High-order numerical algorithm for fractional-order nonlinear diffusion equations with a time delay effect. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 7672-7694. doi: 10.3934/math.2023385
    [9] Xiaoyong Xu, Fengying Zhou . Orthonormal Euler wavelets method for time-fractional Cattaneo equation with Caputo-Fabrizio derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 2736-2762. doi: 10.3934/math.2023144
    [10] Bin Fan . Efficient numerical method for multi-term time-fractional diffusion equations with Caputo-Fabrizio derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7293-7320. doi: 10.3934/math.2024354
  • In this paper, a fast second-order block-centered finite difference method based on the FL2-1σ formula and a weighted approach was proposed for the time fractional Cattaneo equation. Using the special properties of the discrete coefficients and mathematical induction method, we derived the unconditional stability and convergence of the method rigorously. Second-order superconvergence in time and space for the velocity and pressure in discrete L(L2)-norms was established on non-uniform rectangular grids. Numerical examples were provided to verify our theoretical results.



    In this paper, we consider the following time fractional Cattaneo equation:

    pt+DC0Dαtp(ap)=f(x,y,t),(x,y,t)Ω×(0,T], (1.1)
    apn=0,(x,y,t)Ω×(0,T], (1.2)
    p(x,y,0)=φ(x,y),p(x,y,0)t=ψ(x,y),(x,y)Ω, (1.3)

    where Ω=(xL,xR)×(yL,yR), Ω is the boundary, T is the final time, and n is the unit outward normal to Ω. p is the pressure, f(x,y,t), φ(x,y), ψ(x,y) are given known functions, and a=diag(ax(x,y,t),ay(x,y,t)) is a positive definite matrix, i.e., there are two positive constants a and a such that

    0<aaxa,0<aaya.

    The Caputo fractional derivative DC0Dαtp is defined by

    DC0Dαtp(x,y,t)=1Γ(2α)t02p(x,y,s)s2(ts)1αds,1<α<2.

    Equations of this type describe the combined diffusion and wave-like behavior of heat conduction and have been widely used in various fields such as chemistry, biochemistry, thermoelasticity, and fluid mechanics [1,2,3]. More discussions of (1.1)–(1.3) are given in [4,5].

    In recent years, many works have been devoted to numerical methods for the fractional Cattaneo equation. For example, a high-order compact finite difference scheme for the generalized fractional Cattaneo equation was proposed in [6], where the Caputo fractional derivative was discretized by the classical L1 formula. Zhao and Sun [7] constructed a compact Crank-Nicolson difference scheme for the one-dimensional fractional Cattaneo equation, where both the integer-order and fractional-order time derivatives were discretized by the Crank-Nicolson scheme. Ren and Gao [8] developed some compact alternating direction implicit difference schemes for the two-dimensional time fractional Cattaneo equation. Wei [9] presented a new finite difference method to approximate the Caputo fractional derivative and then applied it to introduce a fully discrete local discontinuous Galerkin method for the fractional Cattaneo equation. Nikan et al. [10] studied a local meshless method for the time fractional Cattaneo model.

    The block-centered finite difference (BCFD) method is a powerful tool in computational fluid dynamics [11,12,13]. The key idea of this method is to approximate the pressure at the cell center, the x-component of velocity at the midpoint of the vertical edges of the cell, and the y-component of velocity at the midpoint of the horizontal edges of the cell. The advantage of the BCFD method is that it can guarantee mass conservation and approximate simultaneously the velocity and pressure with second-order accuracy on non-uniform rectangular grids. Recently, the BCFD method has been applied to solve various fractional partial differential equations, such as the time fractional diffusion equation [14,15,16], time fractional advection-dispersion equation [17], nonlinear fractional cable equation [18], and time fractional diffusion-wave equation [19]. In particular, the BCFD method combined with the Crank-Nicolson scheme for (1.1)–(1.3) was analyzed in [20].

    To the best of our knowledge, most of the above methods can only achieve (3α)-order accuracy in time. Moreover, due to the nonlocal dependence of Caputo fractional derivatives, the above methods require the storage of the solutions at all previous time steps, which leads to large computation time and memory. In order to improve computational efficiency, Yan et al. employed the sum-of-exponentials (SOE) approximation to the kernel function and proposed a fast and second-order FL21σ method for the time fractional diffusion equations in [21]. Based on the FL21σ formula and a weighted approach, Lyu et al. [22] constructed a fast linearized finite difference scheme for the nonlinear time fractional wave equation. Their scheme can achieve second-order accuracy in time and greatly reduces the computational complexity. Subsequently, Bai et al. [23] presented a fast second-order finite-difference time-domain method for the time fractional Maxwell system. Although there are some results of fast BCFD methods for the fractional diffusion equations [24,25], there are no studies on the fast second-order BCFD method for the fractional Cattaneo equation.

    The purpose of this paper is to propose and analyze a fast second-order BCFD method for (1.1)–(1.3). For the spatial discretization, we adopt the BCFD method, and for the time discretization, we apply a proper linear weighted combination of the FL21σ formula for the Caputo fractional derivative [22], and establish fitted time approximations for the integer-order terms. Using the special properties of the discrete coefficients and mathematical induction method, we derive the unconditional stability of the proposed method rigorously. Then, by establishing a proper relation between the velocity and the difference of the pressure, we show that the proposed method yields second-order superconvergence in both time and space for the velocity and pressure in discrete L(L2)-norms on a non-uniform rectangular grid. Compared with the original BCFD method in [20], our new method is more accurate and efficient.

    The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we first introduce some notation and basic results, and then develop a fast second-order BCFD method for (1.1)–(1.3), where a special approximation is used for the solution at the first time step. In Section 3, we apply the mathematical induction method to establish the stability of the method. The superconvergent error estimate is derived in Section 4. Finally, in Section 5, three numerical examples are presented to support our theoretical results.

    Throughout the paper, we use C, with or without subscripts, to denote a generic positive constant, whose value may vary in each occurrence.

    To illustrate our fast second-order BCFD method, we introduce the velocity u=(ux,uy)=ap and rewrite (1.1) and (1.2) as

    pt+DC0Dαtp+u=f(x,y,t),(x,y,t)Ω×(0,T], (2.1)
    u=ap,(x,y,t)Ω×(0,T], (2.2)
    un=0,(x,y,t)Ω×(0,T]. (2.3)

    For the time discretization, a proper linear weighted combination of the FL21σ formula is applied for the Caputo fractional derivative and fitted time approximations are established for the integer-order terms. Let N be a positive integer, τ=TN<1 be the time step, σ=3α2, tσ=στ, and tn=nτ,0nN. For a smooth function p on [0,T], we define pσ=p(tσ) and pn=p(tn). Moreover, we set

    dtpn+12=pn+1pnτ,˜pn+σ=σpn+1+(1σ)pn,n0,¯pn12=32σ2˜pn1+σ+2σ12˜pn2+σ,n2,dt¯pn=¯pn+12¯pn12τ,dˆtpn=pn+1pn1τ,ˆpn=¯pn+12+¯pn122,n1,Dtpn+1σ=(22σ)dtpn+12+(2σ1)dˆtpn,n1,˜dtpn+1=σDtpn+1σ+(1σ)Dtpnσ,n1.

    The SOE approximation proposed in [21,26] reads as:

    Lemma 2.1. Let β=α1. Then for given tolerance error ε1, and final time T, there exist a positive integer Ne, positive quadrature nodes sj, and corresponding positive weights ωj such that

    |tβΓ(1β)Nej=1ωjesjt|ε,t[στ,T],

    and the number of quadrature nodes needed is of the order

    Ne=O(log1ε(loglog1ε+logTστ)+log1στ(loglog1ε+log1στ)).

    Denote

    λ=τ1ασ2αΓ(3α),Aj=10(32s)esjτ(σ+1s)ds,Bj=10(s12)esjτ(σ+1s)ds.

    For n=0, let

    g(1)0=λ1σ.

    For n1, let

    g(n+1)i={Nej=1ωje(n1)sjτ[Aj12Bj],i=0,Nej=1ωj[e(nk1)sjτAj+e(nk)sjτBj],1in1,Nej=1ωjBj+λ,i=n.

    Denote

    Dtp1σ=2(1σ)dtp12+(2σ1)p0t,Dtpσ=˜bn(Dtp1σp0t)+p0t,

    where

    bn=Nej=1ωje(n1)sjτBj,˜bn=(3σ1)bn2(1σ)g(n+1)0.

    Then, the weighted combination of the FL21σ formula proposed in [22] for the Caputo derivative is:

    ˆDFˆDαtpn+1={2(1σ)g(1)0(dtp12p0t),n=0,nk=0g(n+1)k(Dtpk+1σDtpkσ),1nN1.

    According to [27,28,29], we have the following lemmas.

    Lemma 2.2. Assume that pC4[0,T]. Then we have

    DC0Dαtp(tσ)=ˆDFˆDαtp1+O(g(1)0τ2),DC0Dαtp(tn)=ˆDFˆDαtpn+1+O(g(n+1)0τ2+ε),1nN1.

    Lemma 2.3. Assume that pC3[0,T]. Then we have

    pσt=2σdtp12+(12σ)p0t+O(τ2),pnt=˜dtpn+1+O(τ2),1nN1.

    Lemma 2.4. The sequence {˜bn}(n1) satisfies

    1<˜bn<3σ11σ.

    Lemma 2.5. The sequences {g(i+1)0}(0in) and {g(n+1)i}(1nN1,1in) satisfy

    (a)g(n+1)1Cg(n+1)0;(b)τni=0g(i+1)0<Cmax1γ2t2γn;(c)τni=01g(i+1)0<Cαmax1γ2tγn+σ;(d)τni=01g(n+1)i<Ct2αn+σ.

    Lemma 2.6. Assume that uC2[0,T]. Then we have

    u(tσ)=˜uσ+O(τ2),u(tn)=ˆun+O(τ2),1nN1.

    Lemma 2.7. For any real sequence {Fn}(1nN1), when τ and ε are sufficiently small, we have

    2˜dtpn+1[ˆDFˆDαtpn+1Fn]ni=0g(n+1)i(Dtpi+1σ)2n1i=0g(n)i(Dtpi+1σ)2(g(n+1)1g(n)1)(Dtp1σ)2g(n+1)0(Dtpσ+1g(n+1)0Fn)2.

    Lemma 2.8. For integer n0, let τ,H and an,bn,cn,dn,γn be non-negative numbers such that

    aM+τMn=0bnτMn=0γnan+τMn=0cn+H,M0,

    and τγn<1. Then

    aM+τMn=0bnexp(τMn=0γn1τγn)(τMn=0cn+H),M0.

    For the spatial discretization, the BCFD method is considered. Let Nx and Ny be two positive integers. The domain Ω is partitioned by Gx×Gy, where

    Gx:xL=x12<x32<<xNx+12=xR,Gy:yL=y12<y32<<yNy+12=yR.

    For 1iNx and 1jNy, we use the following notations

    xi=xi12+xi+122,yj=yj12+yj+122,hi=xi+12xi12,kj=yj+12yj12,h=max1iNxhi,k=max1jNykj.

    We assume that Gx×Gy is regular, that is, there exists a positive constant C such that

    min1iNx1jNy{hi,kj}Cmax1iNx1jNy{hi,kj}.

    Define the grid function spaces:

    Ph={qi,j|1iNx,1jNy},Vxh={vxi+12,j|vx12,j=vxNx+12,j=0,0iNx,1jNy},Vyh={vyi,j+12|vyi,12=vyi,Ny+12=0,1iNx,0jNy},Vh=Vxh×Vyh.

    For a function ω(x,y), let ωl,m denote ω(xl,ym), where l may take values i,i+12 for integer i, and m may take values j,j+12 for integer j. Then, we define the differential operators:

    [dxω]i+12,m=ωi+1,mωi,mhi+12,[Dyω]l,j=ωl,j+12ωl,j12kj,[Dxω]i,m=ωi+12,mωi12,mhi,[dyω]l,j+12=ωl,j+1ωl,jkj+12.

    For functions ω and ψ, we define the following discrete L2 inner products and norms:

    (ω,ψ)m=Nxi=1Nyj=1hikjωi,jψi,j,(ω,ψ)x=Nx1i=1Nyj=1hi+12kjωi+12,jψi+12,j,(ω,ψ)y=Nxi=1Ny1j=1hikj+12ωi,j+12ψi,j+12,ω2ϝ=(ω,ω)ϝ,ϝ=m,x,y.

    For a vector-valued function u=(ux,uy), we define the discrete L2 norm

    u2TM=ux2x+uy2y.

    For 1iNx and 1jNy, define

    δi,j=h2i82pi,jx2+k2j82pi,jy2.

    Then according to [11,20], we have the following lemmas.

    Lemma 2.9. If p is sufficiently smooth, then it holds that

    δ0t=O(h2+k2),Dtδ1σ=O(h2+k2),˜dtδn+1i,j=O(h2+k2),1nN1,ˆDFˆDαtδn+1=O(h2+k2),0nN1.

    Lemma 2.10. If p and u are sufficiently smooth, then for 1nN1, it holds that

    [1ax¯ux]n+12i+12,j=[dx(¯p¯δ)]n+12i+12,j+¯ϵxi+12,j(pn+12),(xi+12,yj)Ω,[1ay¯uy]n+12i,j+12=[dy(¯p¯δ)]n+12i,j+12+¯ϵyi,j+12(pn+12),(xi,yj+12)Ω,

    with the following approximate properties:

    ¯ϵxi+12,j(pn+12)=O(τ2+h2+k2),¯ϵyi,j+12(pn+12)=O(τ2+h2+k2).

    Lemma 2.11. For (vx,vy)Vh and qPh, it holds that

    (Dxvx,q)m=(vx,dxq)x,(Dyvy,q)m=(vy,dyq)y.

    In order to obtain high-order approximations at the first time step, we use the Taylor expansion to get

    pσ=φ+στψ+O(τ2).

    It follows from Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 that

    ˆDFˆDαtp1+2σdtp12+(12σ)ψ(aσ(φ+στψ))=fσ+O(g(1)0τ2),

    which leads to

    2(σ+λ)dtp12=(2σ+2λ1)ψ+(aσ(φ+στψ))+fσ+O(g(1)0τ2).

    Define

    ϖ=φ+τ2(σ+λ){(2σ+2λ1)ψ+(aσ(φ+στψ)+fσ}.

    Then we have

    p1ϖτ=O(g(1)0τ2).

    Therefore,

    |ϖp1|=O(τ3). (2.4)

    With the above preparations, our fast second-order BCFD method reads as follows: Find PnPh and Un=(Ux,n,Uy,n)Vh such that

    [˜dtP]n+1i,j+[ˆDFˆDαtP]n+1i,j+[DxˆUx]ni,j+[DyˆUy]ni,j=fni,j,1iNx,1jNy,1nN1, (2.5)
    ¯Ux,n+12i+12,j=ax,n+12[dx¯P]n+12i+12,j,1iNx1,1jNy,0nN1, (2.6)
    ¯Uy,n+12i,j+12=ay,n+12[dy¯P]ni,j+12,1iNx,1jNy1,0nN1, (2.7)

    with

    P0i,j=φi,j,1iNx,1jNy, (2.8)
    P1i,j=ϖi,j,1iNx,1jNy, (2.9)
    Ux,0i+12,j=ux,0i+12,j,1iNx1,1jNy, (2.10)
    Uy,0i,j+12=uy,0i,j+12,1iNx,1jNy1. (2.11)

    Here,

    ux,0=[axφx]0,uy,0=[ayφy]0,Ψi,j=ψi,j,1iNx,1jNy,¯P12=32σ2˜Pσ+2σ12[σP0+(1σ)(P12τΨ)],¯Ux,12=32σ2˜Ux,σ+2σ12[σUx,0+(1σ)(Ux,12τdxΨ)],¯Uy,12=32σ2˜Uy,σ+2σ12[σUy,0+(1σ)(Uy,12τdyΨ)].

    In this section, we study the stability of the method (2.5)–(2.11). The existence and uniqueness of numerical solutions to (2.5)–(2.11) will follow from these stability results.

    Taking (Vx,Vy,Qh)Vh×Ph, multiplying (2.5) by hikjQij, summing over 1iNx,1jNy, and using Lemma 2.11, we obtain that for 1nN1,

    (˜dtPn+1,Q)m+(ˆDFˆDαtPn+1,Q)m(ˆUx,n,dxQ)x(ˆUy,n,dyQ)y=(fn,Q)m. (3.1)

    Similarly, for 0nN1, it holds that

    ((1ax¯Ux)n+12,Vx)x=(dx¯Pn+12,Vx)x, (3.2)
    ((1ay¯Uy)n+12,Vy)y=(dy¯Pn+12,Vy)y. (3.3)

    Theorem 3.1. For sufficiently small τ and ε, the method (2.5)–(2.11) is unconditionally stable with the following estimate:

    Pnm+UnTMC[fσm+4i=1(ϱim+dxϱix+dyϱiy)+(τ2i=1fn2m)12],

    where

    ϱ1=φ,ϱ2=ψ,ϱ3=(aφ),ϱ4=(aψ).

    Proof. To prove the theorem, we only need to show that for 1nN,

    SnC[f0m+f1m+4i=1(ϱim+dxϱix+dyϱiy)+(τ2i=0fn2m)12], (3.4)

    where

    Sn=max{(Pnm+˜Ux,n1+σx+˜Uy,n1+σy,(2σ1)UnTM}. (3.5)

    Now we prove (3.4) by the mathematical induction method. From (2.6)–(2.11), we easily know that (3.4) holds for n=1. Assume that (3.4) holds for 1nN1. Then it is sufficient to show that (3.4) also holds for n=N.

    A simple computation yields

    ˜dtPn+1=dt¯Pn,1nN1.

    Thus, choosing Q=˜dtPn+1 in (3.1) gives

    ˜dtPn+12m+(ˆDFˆDαtPn+1,˜dtPn+1)m(ˆUx,n,dx(dt¯Pn))x(ˆUy,n,dy(dt¯Pn))y=(fn,˜dtPn+1)m. (3.6)

    Applying Lemma 2.7 yields

    2(ˆDFˆDαtPn+1,˜dtPn+1)mni=0g(n+1)iDtPi+1σ2mn1i=0g(n)iDtPi+1σ2m(g(n+1)1g(n)0)DtP1σ2mg(n+1)0DtPσ2m. (3.7)

    Due to (3.2), we can get

    (dt(1ax¯Ux)n,Vx)x=(dx(dt¯Pn),Vx)x.

    It follows then that

    (ˆUx,n,dx(dt¯Pn))x=(dt(1ax¯Ux)n,ˆUx,n)x=12τ(1ax,n+12¯Ux,n+121ax,n12¯Ux,n12,¯Ux,n+12+¯Ux,n12)x=12dt1ax,n¯Ux,n2x+12(dt(1ax,n)¯Ux,n+12,¯Ux,n12)x12dt1ax,n¯Ux,n2xC(¯Ux,n+122x+¯Ux,n122x). (3.8)

    Similarly, using (3.3), we can easily obtain

    (ˆUy,n,dy(dt¯Pn))y12dt(1ay¯Uy2y)nC(¯Uy,n+122y+¯Uy,n122y). (3.9)

    Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we have

    (fn,˜dtPn+1)m12(˜dtPn+12m+fn2m). (3.10)

    Substituting (3.7)–(3.10) into (3.6), we conclude that

    ˜dtPn+12m+ni=0g(n+1)iDtPi+1σ2mn1i=0g(n)iDtPi+1σ2m+dt(1ax¯Ux2x)n+dt(1ay¯Uy2y)n|g(n+1)1g(n)0|DtP1σ2m+g(n+1)0DtPσ2m+fn2m+C(¯Ux,n+122x+¯Ux,n122x+¯Uy,n122y+¯Uy,n+122y). (3.11)

    Summing up (3.11) for n from 1 to N1 and multiplying by τ, we get

    τN1n=1˜dtPn+12m+τN1i=0g(N)iDtPi+1σ2m+1a(¯Ux,N122x+¯Uy,N122y)1a(¯Ux,122x+¯Uy,122y)+τg(1)0DtP1σ2m+τN1n=1g(n+1)0DtPσ2m+τN1n=1|g(n+1)1g(n)0|DtP1σ2m+τN1n=1fn2m+τN1n=1(¯Ux,n122x+¯Uy,n122y). (3.12)

    Applying Lemma 2.8 to (3.12) gives

    τN1n=1˜dtPn+12m+τN1i=0g(N)iDtPi+1σ2m+1a(¯Ux,N122x+¯Uy,N122y)C(¯Ux,122x+¯Uy,122y+τg(1)0DtP1σ2m+τN1n=1g(n+1)0DtPσ2m+τN1n=1|g(n+1)1g(n)0|DtP1σ2m+τN1n=1fn2m). (3.13)

    By Lemma 2.5, we have

    N1i=0τDtPi+1σ2m(τN1i=01g(N)i)τN1i=0g(N)iDtPi+1σ2mC(τN1i=0g(N)iDtPi+1σ2m). (3.14)

    A direct computation shows that

    (32σ)P0+(σ12)P1(2σ1)ψ2m+N1i=0τDtPi+1σ2m12(32σ)P0+(σ12)P1(2σ1)p1+N1i=0τDtPi+1σ2m=12(32σ)PM+1+(σ12)PN12m. (3.15)

    From [22], we know that

    τN1n=1|g(n+1)0|C, (3.16)

    and

    τN1n=1|g(n+1)1g(n)0|C. (3.17)

    Using Lemma 2.4, (2.8), and (2.9), we obtain

    DtP1σ2m=2(1σ)dtP12+(2σ1)ψ2m2(dtP122m+ψ2m)C(ψ2m+ϱ32m+ϱ42m+fσ2m), (3.18)

    and

    DtPσ2m=˜bnDtp1σ+(1˜bn)ψ2mC(Dtp1σ2m+ψ2m)C(ψ2m+ϱ32m+ϱ42m+fσ2m). (3.19)

    Combining estimates (3.13)–(3.19) yields

    (τN1n=1˜dtPn+12m)12+(32σ)PN+(σ12)PN1m+¯Ux,N12x+¯Uy,N12yC[fσm+4i=1(ϱim+dxϱix+dyϱiy)+(τ2i=0fn2m)12]. (3.20)

    On the other hand, using the triangle inequality, we have

    (32σ)PN+(σ12)PN1m+¯Ux,N12x+¯Uy,N12y(32σ)[PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy](σ12)[PN1m+˜Ux,N2+σx+˜Uy,N2+σy]. (3.21)

    Substituting (3.21) into (3.20), we get

    (32σ)[PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy](σ12)[PN1m+˜Ux,N2+σx+˜Uy,N2+σy]C[fσm+4i=1(ϱim+dxϱix+dyϱiy)+(τ2i=0fn2m)12]. (3.22)

    Now, we discuss the following two cases:

    Case (Ⅰ): PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σyPN1m+˜Ux,N2+σx+˜Uy,N2+σy.

    (ⅰ) If UNTMUN1TM, then SNSN1, and (3.4) follows directly.

    (ⅱ) If UNTMUN1TM, then

    ˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σyσUNTM(1σ)UN1TM(2σ1)UNTM.

    From (3.5), we get

    SN=PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σySN1,

    and thus (3.4) follows directly.

    Case (Ⅱ): PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σyPN1m+˜Ux,N2+σx+˜Uy,N2+σy.

    In this situation, we have

    (32σ)[PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy](σ12)[PN1m+˜Ux,N2+σx+˜Uy,N2+σy](22σ)[PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy].

    From (3.22), it follows that

    PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σyC[fσm+4i=1(ϱim+dxϱix+dyϱiy)+(τ2i=0fn2m)12]. (3.23)

    (ⅰ) If UNTMUN1TM, then we have

    Subcase (1): SN=PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy. Then, (3.4) easily follows from (3.23).

    Subcase (2): SN=(2σ1)UNTM(2σ1)UN1TMSN1, which immediately leads to (3.4).

    (ⅱ) If UNTMUN1TM, then

    ˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy(2σ1)UNTM.

    From (3.5), we know that

    SN=PNm+˜Ux,N1+σx+˜Uy,N1+σy.

    Using (3.23), (3.4) is clarified, and so the proof is finished.

    In this section, we investigate the superconvergence of the method (2.5)–(2.11).

    Let us introduce the error functions:

    ξni,j=(Ppδ)ni,j,1iNx,1jNy,ηx,ni+12,j=(Uxux)ni+12,j,0iNx,1jNy,ηy,ni,j+12=(Uxux)ni,j+12,1iNx,0jNy.

    By (2.4), (2.8)–(2.11), we can easily obtain

    ξ0m=ηx,0x=ηy,0y=0,¯ξ12=(2σ2+3σ12)ξ1=O(τ3), (4.1)
    ¯ηx,12=(2σ2+3σ12)ηx,1+O(τ2+h2),¯ηy,12=(2σ2+3σ12)ηy,1+O(τ2+k2). (4.2)

    Lemma 4.1. Assume that the analytical solution p is sufficiently smooth. Then, it holds that

    ηx,1x+ηy,1yC(τ2+h2+k2).

    Proof. Using the Taylor expansion, we have

    [1ax¯ux]12i+12,j=[dx(¯p¯δ)]12i+12,j+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi+12,yj)Ω,[1ay¯uy]12i,j+12=[dy(¯p¯δ)]12i,j+12+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi,yj+12)Ω,

    which, in combination with (2.6) and (2.7), leads to

    [1ax¯ηx]12i+12,j=[dx(¯ξ)]12i+12,j+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi+12,yj)Ω,[1ay¯ηy]12i,j+12=[dy(¯ξ)]12i,j+12+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi,yj+12)Ω.

    From (4.1) and (4.2), we then get

    [1ax,12ηx,1]i+12,j=[dx(ξ1)]i+12,j+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi+12,yj)Ω,[1ay,12ηy,1]i,j+12=[dy(ξ1)]i,j+12+O(τ2+h2+k2),(xi,yj+12)Ω,

    and consequently,

    ηx,1xCdx(p1ϖ)x+C(τ2+h2+k2)C(τ2+h2+k2). (4.3)

    Similarly,

    ηy,1yC(τ2+h2+k2). (4.4)

    We conclude the proof by combining (4.3) and (4.4).

    Using Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 2.9, and (3.1), we easily obtain that for 1nN1,

    (˜dtξn+1,Q)m+(ˆDFˆDαtξn+1,Q)m(ˆηx,n,dxQ)x(ˆηy,n,dyQ)y=(Rn,Q)m, (4.5)

    where

    Dtξ1σ=(22σ)ξ1τ,Dtξσ=˜bnDtξ1σ, (4.6)

    and

    Rni,j=pni,jt˜dt(pδ)n+1i,j+[DC0Dαtp]ni,j[ˆDFˆDαt(pδ)]n+1i,j+ux,ni,jx[Dxˆux]ni,j+uy,ni,jy[Dyˆuy]ni,j=O(g(n+1)0τ2+h2+k2+ε). (4.7)

    Using (3.2), (3.3), and Lemmas 2.10 and 4.1, we conclude that for 0nN,

    ((1ax¯ηx)n+12,Vx)x=(dx¯ξn+12,Vx)x(¯ϵx,n+12(p),Vx)x, (4.8)
    ((1ay¯ηy)n+12,Vy)y=(dy¯ξn+12,Vy)y(¯ϵy,n+12(p),Vy)y, (4.9)

    where

    ¯ϵx,n+12(p)=O(τ2+h2+k2),¯ϵy,n+12(p)=O(τ2+h2+k2).

    Theorem 4.1. Assume that the analytical solution p is sufficiently smooth. Then for sufficiently small τ and ε, it holds that

    ξnm+ηx,nx+ηy,nyC(τ2+h2+k2+ε),0nN.

    Proof. The proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.1. We only need to apply the mathematical induction method to show

    SnC(τ2+h2+k2+ε),1nN, (4.10)

    where

    Sn=max{(ξnm+˜ηx,n1+σx+˜ηy,n1+σy,(2σ1)(ηx,nx+ηy,ny)}. (4.11)

    By (4.1) and Lemma 4.1, we know that (4.10) holds for n=1. Assume that (4.10) holds for 1nN1. Then it suffices to prove that (4.10) also holds for n=N.

    Taking Q=˜dtξn+1=dt¯ξn in (4.5) leads to

    ˜dtξn+12m+(ˆDFˆDαtξn+1Rn,˜dtξn+1)m(ˆηx,n,dx(dt¯ξn))x(ˆηy,n,dy(dt¯ξn))y=0. (4.12)

    Applying Lemma 2.7 yields

    2(ˆDFˆDαtξn+1Rn,˜dtξn+1)mni=0g(n+1)iDtξi+1σ2mn1i=0g(n)iDtξi+1σ2m(g(n+1)1g(n)0)Dtξ1σ2mg(n+1)0Dtξσ+1g(n+1)0Rn2m. (4.13)

    By (4.8), we have

    (dt(1ax¯ηx)n,Vx)x=(dx(dt¯ξn),Vx)x(dt(¯ϵx,n(p)),Vx)x,

    and therefore

    (ˆηx,n,dx(dt¯ξn))x=(dt(1ax¯ηx)n,ˆηx,n)x+(dt(¯ϵx(pn)),ˆηx,n)x=12dt1ax,n¯ηx,n2x+(dt(¯ϵx,n(p)),ˆηx,n)x+12(dt(1ax,n)¯ηx,n+12,¯ηx,n12)x12dt1ax,n¯ηx,n2xC(dt(¯ϵx,n(p))2x+¯ηx,n+122x+¯ηx,n122x). (4.14)

    Similarly, using (4.9), we can obtain

    (ˆηy,n,dy(dt¯ξn))y12dt1ay,n¯ηy,n2yC(dt(¯ϵy,n(p))2y+¯ηy,n+122y+¯ηy,n122y). (4.15)

    Substituting (4.13)–(4.15) into (4.12) gives

    2˜dtξn+12m+ni=0g(n+1)iDtξi+1σ2mn1i=0g(n)iDtξi+1σ2m+dt1ax,n¯ηx,n2x+dt1ay,n¯ηy,n2y|g(n+1)1g(n)0|Dtξ1σ2m+g(n+1)0Dtξσ+1g(n+1)0Rn2m+C(dt(¯ϵx,n(p))2x+dt(¯ϵy,n(p))2y+¯ηx,n+122x+¯ηx,n122x). (4.16)

    Summing up (4.16) for n from 1 to N1 and multiplying by τ, we conclude that

    1a(¯ηx,N122x+¯ηy,N122y)+2τN1n=1˜dtξn+12m+τN1i=0g(N)iDtξi+1σ2m1a(¯ηx,122x+¯ηy,122y)+τN1n=11g(n+1)0Rn2m+τN1n=1g(n+1)0Dtξσ2m+τg(1)0Dtξ1σ2m+τN1n=1|g(n+1)1g(n)0|Dtξ1σ2m+CτN1n=1(dt(¯ϵx,n(p))2x+dt(¯ϵy,n(p))2y)+CτN1n=0(¯ηx,n+122x+¯ηx,n122x).

    Using Lemma 2.8, one gets

    ¯ηx,N122x+¯ηy,N122y+τN1n=1˜dtξn+12m+τN1i=0g(N)iDtξi+1σ2mC5i=0Ti, (4.17)

    where

    T1=¯ηx,122x+¯ηy,122y,T2=τN1n=11g(n+1)0Rn2m,T3=τN1n=1g(n+1)0Dtξσ2m,T4=τg(1)0Dtξ1σ2m+τN1n=1|g(n+1)1g(n)0|Dtξ1σ2m,T5=τN1n=1(dt(¯ϵx,n(p))2x+dt(¯ϵy,n(p))2y).

    Using (4.2) and Lemma 4.1, we have

    T1C(τ2+h2+k2)2. (4.18)

    Using (4.7) and Lemma 2.5, we obtain

    T2CτN1n=11g(n+1)0(g(n+1)0τ2+h2+k2+ε)2CτN1n=1g(n+1)0τ4+CτN1n=11g(n+1)0(h2+k2+ε)2C(τ2+h2+k2+ε)2. (4.19)

    Using (3.16), (3.17), (4.1), and (4.6), we get

    T3CDtξσ2mCτ2ξ12mCτ4, (4.20)
    T4CDtξ1σ2mCτ2ξ12mCτ4. (4.21)

    By Lemma 2.10, we have

    T5=CτN1n=1(¯ϵx,n(dt(p))2x+¯ϵy,n(dt(p))2y)C(τ2+h2+k2)2. (4.22)

    Substituting (4.18)–(4.22) into (4.17), we obtain

    ¯ηx,N122x+¯ηy,N122y+τN1n=1(˜dtξn+12m+g(N)iDtξi+1σ2m)C(τ2+h2+k2+ε)2.

    Similar to the proof of Theorem 3.1, we can conclude that

    (32σ)[ξNm+˜ηx,Nσx+˜ηy,Nσy](σ12)[ξN1m+˜ηx,N2+σx+˜ηy,N2+σy]C(τ2+h2+k2+ε)2. (4.23)

    Again, we discuss the following two cases:

    Case (Ⅰ): ξNm+˜ηx,N1+σx+˜ηy,N1+σyξN1m+˜ηx,N2+σx+˜ηy,N2+σy.

    In this case, we can obtain SNSN1, and (4.10) follows directly.

    Case (Ⅱ): ξNm+˜ηx,N1+σx+˜ηy,N1+σyξN1m+˜ηx,N2+σx+˜ηy,N2+σy.

    We use (4.23) to obtain

    ξNm+˜ηx,N1+σx+˜ηy,N1+σyC(τ2+h2+k2+ε)2. (4.24)

    Following similar arguments as in Theorem 3.1, we can get

    SNSN1orSN=ξNm+˜ηx,N1+σx+˜ηy,N1+σy. (4.25)

    By combining (4.24) and (4.25), we obtain (4.10), which completes the proof.

    Theorem 4.2. Assume that the analytical solution p is sufficiently smooth. Then for sufficiently small τ and ε, it holds that

    (pP)nm+(uU)nTMC(τ2+h2+k2+ε),0nN.

    Proof. The proof follows from the triangle inequality, the estimation of δ, and Theorem 4.1.

    Remark 4.1. Theorem 4.2 shows that our method has the second-order temporal accuracy, regardless of the order of the Caputo fractional derivative. It is noteworthy that instead of presenting error estimates for the velocity in discrete L2(L2)-norm [20], we provide rigorous error estimates for the velocity in discrete L(L2)-norm. Moreover, the application of the SOE approach reduces storage and computational cost. Thus, our method is more accurate and efficient than the original BCFD method in [20].

    In this section, we provide four numerical examples to verify our theoretical results. The first three examples are chosen to demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of the proposed method for smooth solutions, and the fourth example is chosen to demonstrate the performance of the proposed method for solutions with sharp boundary layers. These examples are taken from [20,30] with slight modifications. In all experiments, we choose Ω=(0,1)×(0,1),T=1,ax=ay=1,ε=109, and use the Fast-BCFD method and CN-BCFD method to denote our fast second-order BCFD method (2.5)–(2.11) and the Crank-Nicolson BCFD method proposed in [20].

    Example 5.1. The initial condition and the right side are chosen according to the exact solution

    p(x,y,t)=100t5+αx2(1x)2y2(1y)2.

    Example 5.2. The initial condition and the right side are chosen according to the exact solution

    p(x,y,t)=(1+t4.1)x2(1x)2y2(1y)2.

    Example 5.3. The initial condition and the right side are chosen according to the exact solution

    p(x,y,t)=t3+αcos(πx)cos(πy).

    Example 5.4. The initial condition and the right side are chosen according to the exact solution

    p(x,y,t)=t3+αtanh(20x)tanh(20y).

    To compare the accuracy of the Fast-BCFD method and the CN-BCFD method, we take Nx=Ny=N and compute the solutions on three consecutive meshes with N=40,80,160. The errors and convergent rates for Examples 5.1–5.3 with different α are shown in Tables 13, respectively. These numerical results show that the convergence rates of the velocity and pressure in discrete L(L2)-norms are all around 2 for the Fast-BCFD method, and are all around 3α for the CN-BCFD method. Clearly, the Fast-BCFD method is more accurate than the CN-BCFD method when α tends to 2.

    Table 1.  Errors and convergence rates of both methods for Example 5.1.
    Method α N pnPnm Order unUnTM Order
    1.1 40 4.5547E-4 3.8636E-3
    80 1.1413E-4 2.00 9.6888E-4 2.00
    160 2.8565E-5 2.00 2.4252E-4 2.00
    1.3 40 5.8065E-4 4.5369E-3
    80 1.4581E-4 1.99 1.1405E-3 1.99
    160 3.6518E-5 2.00 2.8578E-4 2.00
    1.5 40 6.5259E-4 4.9172E-3
    Fast-BCFD 80 1.6379E-4 1.99 1.2368E-3 1.99
    160 4.0972E-5 2.00 3.0989E-4 2.00
    1.7 40 6.5791E-4 4.9401E-3
    80 1.6473E-4 2.00 1.2410E-3 1.99
    160 4.1100E-5 2.00 3.1059E-4 2.00
    1.9 40 5.9131E-4 4.5537E-3
    80 1.4773E-4 2.00 1.1412E-3 2.00
    160 3.6809E-5 2.00 2.8520E-4 2.00
    1.1 40 2.5531E-4 1.6247E-3
    80 6.6141E-5 1.95 4.0348E-4 2.01
    160 1.7156E-5 1.95 1.0008E-4 2.01
    1.3 40 4.2173E-4 1.3922E-3
    80 1.2976E-4 1.70 3.1577E-4 2.14
    160 4.0069E-5 1.70 6.9280E-5 2.19
    1.5 40 1.0260E-3 6.1583E-4
    CN-BCFD 80 3.7730E-4 1.44 2.5303E-4 1.28
    160 1.3722E-4 1.46 1.3157E-4 0.94
    1.7 40 2.6163E-3 3.9839E-3
    80 1.1005E-3 1.25 1.9826E-3 1.01
    160 4.5691E-4 1.27 8.9774E-4 1.14
    1.9 40 6.2850E-3 1.5363E-2
    80 2.9822E-3 1.08 7.7734E-3 0.98
    160 1.4050E-3 1.09 3.7784E-3 1.04

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  Errors and convergence rates of both methods for Example 5.2.
    Method α N pnPnm Order unUnTM Order
    1.1 40 2.1773E-5 1.3400E-5
    80 5.5446E-6 1.97 3.3530E-6 2.00
    160 1.3988E-6 1.99 8.3881E-7 2.00
    1.3 40 2.0073E-5 1.5197E-5
    80 5.1249E-6 1.97 3.8112E-6 2.00
    160 1.2946E-6 1.99 9.5415E-7 2.00
    1.5 40 1.8491E-5 1.5953E-5
    Fast-BCFD 80 4.7351E-6 1.97 4.0012E-6 2.00
    160 1.1980E-6 1.98 1.0017E-6 2.00
    1.7 40 1.6968E-5 1.5891E-5
    80 4.3597E-6 1.96 3.9693E-6 2.00
    160 1.1051E-6 1.98 9.9180E-7 2.00
    1.9 40 1.5427E-5 1.6415E-5
    80 3.9770E-6 1.96 4.0669E-6 2.01
    160 1.0097E-6 1.98 1.0124E-6 2.01
    1.1 40 2.4095E-5 5.1024E-6
    80 6.0357E-6 2.00 1.2736E-6 2.00
    160 1.5120E-6 2.00 3.1744E-7 2.00
    1.3 40 2.3674E-5 4.7435E-6
    80 6.0253E-6 1.97 1.1553E-6 2.04
    160 1.5392E-6 1.97 2.8038E-7 2.04
    1.5 40 2.5165E-5 4.2276E-6
    CN-BCFD 80 6.8076E-6 1.89 1.1653E-6 1.86
    160 1.8851E-6 1.85 3.7917E-7 1.62
    1.7 40 3.1189E-5 8.6029E-6
    80 9.7784E-6 1.67 3.8927E-6 1.14
    160 3.2519E-6 1.59 1.7141E-6 1.18
    1.9 40 4.7383E-5 2.7019E-5
    80 1.8426E-5 1.36 1.3965E-5 0.95
    160 7.6872E-6 1.26 6.8800E-6 1.02

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  Errors and convergence rates of both methods for Example 5.3.
    Method α N pnPnm Order unUnTM Order
    1.1 40 8.3329E-4 4.2722E-3
    80 2.0857E-4 2.00 1.0693E-3 2.00
    160 5.2175E-5 2.00 2.6749E-4 2.00
    1.3 40 1.0588E-3 5.2738E-3
    80 2.6540E-4 2.00 1.3218E-3 2.00
    160 6.6430E-5 2.00 3.3082E-4 2.00
    1.5 40 1.2119 E-3 5.9539E-3
    Fast-BCFD 80 3.0384E-4 2.00 1.4926E-3 2.00
    160 7.6042E-5 2.00 3.7352E-4 2.00
    1.7 40 1.2623E-3 6.1778E-3
    80 3.1613E-4 2.00 1.5472E-3 2.00
    160 7.9031E-5 2.00 3.8680E-4 2.00
    1.9 40 1.1776E-3 5.8014E-3
    80 2.9437E-4 2.00 1.4505E-3 2.00
    160 7.3489E-5 2.00 3.6218E-4 2.00
    1.1 40 2.3487E-4 1.6142E-3
    80 5.7677E-5 2.03 3.9897E-4 2.02
    160 1.4143E-5 2.03 9.8518E-4 2.02
    1.3 40 1.3782E-4 1.1831E-3
    80 2.1693E-5 2.67 2.3911E-4 2.31
    160 1.5014E-6 3.85 4.2355E-4 2.50
    1.5 40 3.6029E-4 1.0294E-3
    CN-BCFD 80 1.7237E-4 1.06 6.2302E-4 0.72
    160 7.2154E-5 1.26 2.8488E-4 1.13
    1.7 40 2.1646E-3 9.0437E-3
    80 9.6238E-4 1.17 4.1327E-3 1.13
    160 4.1150E-4 1.23 1.7925E-3 1.21
    1.9 40 7.8199E-3 3.4163E-2
    80 3.7992E-3 1.04 1.6736E-2 1.03
    160 1.8100E-3 1.07 8.0056E-3 1.06

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To compare the computational efficiency of the Fast-BCFD method and CN-BCFD method, we compare the CPU time in seconds of both methods. Since the results for different α are very similar, we only present the results for α=1.5 for brevity. From Table 4, one can check that for small time steps, the Fast-BCFD method is more efficient than the CN-BCFD method.

    Table 4.  CPU time in seconds with α=1.5 and Nx=Ny=10.
    N Fast-BCFD CN-BCFD
    Example 5.1 4000 16.07 25.58
    8000 31.85 83.22
    16000 63.91 316.00
    32000 129.42 1197.31
    Example 5.2 4000 15.05 23.48
    8000 29.94 82.55
    16000 59.82 308.80
    32000 119.39 1174.04
    Example 5.3 4000 18.54 26.51
    8000 36.95 88.77
    16000 73.47 320.66
    32000 147.52 1204.43

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    For Example 5.4, the exact solution exhibits a sharp layer at x=0 and y=0. In order to obtain better accuracy, we adopt the following mesh function:

    xi+12=(iNx)2,0iNx,yj+12=(jNy)2,0jNy.

    Numerical results for this example with α=1.9 are summarized in Table 5. Obviously, it can be seen that numerical results using a non-uniform grid are also in agreement with our theoretical analysis. Figures 13 depict the graphs of the exact solutions and the numerical solutions computed by the Fast-BCFD method at time T=1 on the non-uniform 40×40 mesh when α=1.9. For a better comparison, Figure 4 shows the computed pressure profiles along y=x, ux-velocity profiles along y=0.5, and uy-velocity profiles along x=0.5. One can observe that our numerical solutions are in good agreement with the exact solutions.

    Table 5.  Errors and convergence rates of the Fast-BCFD method for Example 5.4.
    N pnPnm Order unUnTM Order
    20 3.6921E-2 8.6083E-2
    40 9.2329E-3 2.00 2.1518E-2 2.00
    80 2.3087E-3 2.00 5.3842E-3 2.00
    160 5.7695E-4 2.00 1.3470E-3 2.00

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1.  pn and Pn at T=1 for Example 5.4.
    Figure 2.  ux,n and Ux,n at T=1 for Example 5.4.
    Figure 3.  uy,n and Uy,n at T=1 for Example 5.4.
    Figure 4.  The computed pressure profiles along y=x, ux-velocity profiles along y=0.5, and uy-velocity profiles along x=0.5 of the Fast-BCFD method at T=1 for Example 5.4.

    In this paper, a fast second-order BCFD method based on the FL2-1σ formula and a weighted approach was presented for the two-dimensional time fractional Cattaneo equation. The corresponding stability and superconvergence analysis on non-uniform rectangular grids were obtained. The accuracy and efficiency of the proposed method were shown by four numerical examples.

    The author declares he has not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Ningxia (No. 2023AAC03002).

    The author declares no conflicts of interest.



    [1] A. Compte, R. Metzler, The generalized Cattaneo equation for the description of anomalous transport processes, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 30 (1997), 7277–7289. https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/30/21/006 doi: 10.1088/0305-4470/30/21/006
    [2] Y. Z. Povstenko, Fractional Cattaneo-type equations and generalized thermoelasticity, J. Therm. Stresses, 34 (2011), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495739.2010.511931 doi: 10.1080/01495739.2010.511931
    [3] H. T. Qi, X. Y. Jiang, Solutions of the space-time fractional Cattaneo diffusion equation, Phys. A, 390 (2011), 1876–1883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2011.02.010 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2011.02.010
    [4] Z. N. Xue, G. Q. Cao, Y. J. Yu, J. L. Liu, Coupled thermoelastic fracture analysis of a cracked fiber reinforced composite hollow cylinder by fractional Cattaneo-Vernotte models, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mec., 121 (2022), 103538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103538 doi: 10.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103538
    [5] Y. J. Yu, Z. C. Deng, Fractional order theory of Cattaneo-type thermoelasticity using new fractional derivatives, Appl. Math. Model., 87 (2020), 731–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2020.06.023 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2020.06.023
    [6] S. Vong, H. Pang, X. Q. Jin, A high-order difference scheme for the generalized Cattaneo equation, East Asian J. Appl. Math., 2 (2012), 170–184. https://doi.org/10.4208/eajam.110312.240412a doi: 10.4208/eajam.110312.240412a
    [7] X. Zhao, Z. Z. Sun, Compact Crank-Nicolson schemes for a class of fractional Cattaneo equation in inhomogeneous medium, J. Sci. Comput., 62 (2014), 747–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-014-9874-5 doi: 10.1007/s10915-014-9874-5
    [8] J. C. Ren, G. H. Gao, Efficient and stable numerical methods for the two-dimensional fractional Cattaneo equation, Numer. Algor., 69 (2015), 795–818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-014-9926-9 doi: 10.1007/s11075-014-9926-9
    [9] L. L. Wei, Analysis of a new finite difference/local discontinuous Galerkin method for the fractional Cattaneo equation, Numer. Algor., 77 (2018), 675–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-017-0334-9 doi: 10.1007/s11075-017-0334-9
    [10] O. Nikan, Z. Avazzadeh, J. A. T. Machado, Numerical approach for modeling fractional heat conduction in porous medium with the generalized Cattaneo model, Appl. Math. Model., 100 (2021), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2021.07.025 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2021.07.025
    [11] A. Weiser, M. F. Wheeler, On convergence of block-centered finite-differences for elliptic problems, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 25 (1988), 351–375. https://doi.org/10.1137/0725025 doi: 10.1137/0725025
    [12] H. Rui, H. Pan, A block-centered finite difference method for the Darcy-Forchheimer model, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 5 (2012), 2612–2631. https://doi.org/10.1137/110858239 doi: 10.1137/110858239
    [13] W. Liu, J. T. Cui, J. Xin, A block-centered finite difference method for an unsteady asymptotic coupled model in fractured media aquifer system, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 337 (2018), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2017.12.035 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2017.12.035
    [14] Y. L. Jing, C. Li, Block-centered finite difference method for a tempered subdiffusion model with time-dependent coefficients, Comput. Math. Appl., 145 (2023) 202–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2023.06.014
    [15] S. Y. Zhai, X. L. Feng, A block-centered finite-difference method for the time-fractional diffusion equation on nonuniform grids, Numer. Heat Tr. B-Fund., 69 (2016), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407790.2015.1097101 doi: 10.1080/10407790.2015.1097101
    [16] Z. G. Liu, X. L. Li, A parallel CGS block-centered finite difference method for a nonlinear time-fractional parabolic equation, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng., 308 (2016), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.05.028 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2016.05.028
    [17] X. L. Li, H. X. Rui, A high-order fully conservative block-centered finite difference method for the time-fractional advection-dispersion equation, Appl. Numer. Math., 124 (2018), 89–109. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.apnum.2017.10.004 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2017.10.004
    [18] X. L. Li, H. X. Rui, Stability and convergence based on the finite difference method for the nonlinear fractional cable equation on non-uniform staggered grids, Appl. Numer. Math., 152 (2020), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2019.11.013 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2019.11.013
    [19] X. L. Li, H. X. Rui, A block-centered finite difference method for the distributed-order time-fractional diffusion-wave equation, Appl. Numer. Math., 131 (2018), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2018.04.013 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2018.04.013
    [20] X. L. Li, H. X. Rui, Z. G. Liu, A block-centered finite difference method for fractional Cattaneo equation, Numer. Meth. Part. D. E., 34 (2017), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/num.22198 doi: 10.1002/num.22198
    [21] Y. G. Yan, Z. Z. Sun, J. W. Zhang, Fast evaluation of the Caputo fractional derivative and its applications to fractional diffusion equations: a second-order scheme, Commun. Comput. Phys., 22 (2017), 1028–1048. https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.OA-2017-0019 doi: 10.4208/cicp.OA-2017-0019
    [22] P. Lyu, Y. X. Liang, Z. B. Wang, A fast linearized finite difference method for the nonlinear multi-term time-fractional wave equation, Appl. Numer. Math., 151 (2020), 448–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2019.11.012 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2019.11.012
    [23] X. X. Bai, J. Huang, H. X. Rui, S. Wang, Numerical simulation for 2D/3D time fractional Maxwell's system based on a fast second-order FDTD algorithm, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 416 (2022), 114590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2022.114590 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2022.114590
    [24] L. Ma, H. F. Fu, B. Y. Zhang, S. S. Xie, A fast compact block-centered finite difference method on graded meshes for time-fractional reaction-diffusion equations and its robust analysis, Numer. Math. Theory Me., 17 (2024), 429–462. https://doi.org/10.4208/nmtma.OA-2023-0108 doi: 10.4208/nmtma.OA-2023-0108
    [25] X. Zhao, X. L. Li, Z. Y. Li, Fast and efficient finite difference method for the distributed-order diffusion equation based on the staggered grids, Appl. Numer. Math., 174 (2022), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2022.01.006 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2022.01.006
    [26] S. D. Jiang, J. W. Zhang, Q. Zhang, Z. M. Zhang, Fast evaluation of the Caputo fractional derivative and its applications to fractional diffusion equations, Commun. Comput. Phys., 21 (2017), 650–678. https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.OA-2016-0136 doi: 10.4208/cicp.OA-2016-0136
    [27] Z. Guan, J. G. Wang, Y. Liu, Y. F. Nie, Unconditionally optimal convergence of a linearized Galerkin FEM for the nonlinear time-fractional mobile/immobile transport equation, Appl. Numer. Math., 172 (2022), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2021.10.004 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2021.10.004
    [28] P. Lyu, S. Vong, A linearized second-order scheme for nonlinear time fractional Klein-Gordon type equations, Numer. Algor., 78 (2018), 485–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-017-0385-y doi: 10.1007/s11075-017-0385-y
    [29] J. G. Heywood, R. Rannacher, Finite-element approximation of the nonstationary Navier-Stokes problem part Ⅳ: Error analysis for second-order time discretization, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 27 (1990), 353–384. https://doi.org/10.1137/0727022 doi: 10.1137/0727022
    [30] L. J. Nong, Q. Yi, A. Chen, A fast second-order ADI finite difference scheme for the two-dimensional time-fractional Cattaneo equation with spatially variable coefficients, Fractal Fract., 8 (2024), 453. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8080453 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract8080453
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(202) PDF downloads(40) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(4)  /  Tables(5)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog