
Hydrogen is an environmentally attractive transportation fuel that can replace fossil fuels. The iodine-sulfur (I-S) thermo-chemical process involves three reaction steps. The Bunsen reaction is one of the main reaction steps of I-S process and plays an important role in defining overall process efficiency. Different types of reactors are being studied, including the oscillatory baffle Bunsen reactor. The reactor selection is based on process intensification and process integration, i.e., reaction and separation in the single equipment. Simulations are performed for two-dimensional cases by solving incompressible Navier-Stokes equations along with continuity equation, the geometry chosen is of single section in the column and diameter of 50 mm and baffle spacing of 50, 75,100 mm i.e. 1, 1.5 and 2 times the diameter of column and baffle free area 22%. The residence time distribution experiments are carried out in a metallic reactor with NaCl as a tracer operated at different frequencies, amplitudes and flow rates. D/uL is evaluated from experimental curves. The power per unit mass is compared for oscillatory baffled column and stirred tank for a semi-batch process. From the numerical simulations, good eddy interactions are present at higher frequencies and amplitudes and at a baffle spacing of 1.5 times the diameter of the column. Residence time distribution analysis gives a lower dispersion number at medium frequencies and higher amplitudes with constant flow rate. If the flow rates are high, then it is better to operate at higher frequencies and amplitudes to achieve plug flow behavior. Power per unit mass is less for oscillatory baffle column compared to the stirred tank of given configuration. With better mixing performance and less power per unit volume, the oscillatory baffle column is a good alternative to other columns.
Citation: V Nafees Ahmed, A Shriniwas Rao. Performance evaluation of oscillatory baffle Bunsen reactor in iodine sulfur thermochemical process for hydrogen production[J]. Clean Technologies and Recycling, 2023, 3(4): 267-282. doi: 10.3934/ctr.2023017
[1] | Sayed Saifullah, Amir Ali, Zareen A. Khan . Analysis of nonlinear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equation with power law kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5275-5290. doi: 10.3934/math.2022293 |
[2] | Khudhayr A. Rashedi, Musawa Yahya Almusawa, Hassan Almusawa, Tariq S. Alshammari, Adel Almarashi . Lump-type kink wave phenomena of the space-time fractional phi-four equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 34372-34386. doi: 10.3934/math.20241637 |
[3] | Khalid K. Ali, Mohamed S. Mohamed, Weam G. Alharbi, M. Maneea . Solving the time fractional q-deformed tanh-Gordon equation: A theoretical analysis using controlled Picard's transform method. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24654-24676. doi: 10.3934/math.20241201 |
[4] | Jing Li, Linlin Dai, Kamran, Waqas Nazeer . Numerical solution of multi-term time fractional wave diffusion equation using transform based local meshless method and quadrature. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 5813-5838. doi: 10.3934/math.2020373 |
[5] | Sunyoung Bu . A collocation methods based on the quadratic quadrature technique for fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 804-820. doi: 10.3934/math.2022048 |
[6] | Abdul Samad, Imran Siddique, Fahd Jarad . Meshfree numerical integration for some challenging multi-term fractional order PDEs. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14249-14269. doi: 10.3934/math.2022785 |
[7] | Mustafa Inc, Hadi Rezazadeh, Javad Vahidi, Mostafa Eslami, Mehmet Ali Akinlar, Muhammad Nasir Ali, Yu-Ming Chu . New solitary wave solutions for the conformable Klein-Gordon equation with quantic nonlinearity. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6972-6984. doi: 10.3934/math.2020447 |
[8] | Farman Ali Shah, Kamran, Zareen A Khan, Fatima Azmi, Nabil Mlaiki . A hybrid collocation method for the approximation of 2D time fractional diffusion-wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27122-27149. doi: 10.3934/math.20241319 |
[9] | Bengisen Pekmen Geridonmez . RBF simulation of natural convection in a nanofluid-filled cavity. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 195-207. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.195 |
[10] | 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 |
Hydrogen is an environmentally attractive transportation fuel that can replace fossil fuels. The iodine-sulfur (I-S) thermo-chemical process involves three reaction steps. The Bunsen reaction is one of the main reaction steps of I-S process and plays an important role in defining overall process efficiency. Different types of reactors are being studied, including the oscillatory baffle Bunsen reactor. The reactor selection is based on process intensification and process integration, i.e., reaction and separation in the single equipment. Simulations are performed for two-dimensional cases by solving incompressible Navier-Stokes equations along with continuity equation, the geometry chosen is of single section in the column and diameter of 50 mm and baffle spacing of 50, 75,100 mm i.e. 1, 1.5 and 2 times the diameter of column and baffle free area 22%. The residence time distribution experiments are carried out in a metallic reactor with NaCl as a tracer operated at different frequencies, amplitudes and flow rates. D/uL is evaluated from experimental curves. The power per unit mass is compared for oscillatory baffled column and stirred tank for a semi-batch process. From the numerical simulations, good eddy interactions are present at higher frequencies and amplitudes and at a baffle spacing of 1.5 times the diameter of the column. Residence time distribution analysis gives a lower dispersion number at medium frequencies and higher amplitudes with constant flow rate. If the flow rates are high, then it is better to operate at higher frequencies and amplitudes to achieve plug flow behavior. Power per unit mass is less for oscillatory baffle column compared to the stirred tank of given configuration. With better mixing performance and less power per unit volume, the oscillatory baffle column is a good alternative to other columns.
Fractional calculus have recently become a fascinating field of study due to its vast applications in various aspects of modern life. It has been observed that many physical phenomena can be modeled successfully by means of fractional order differential equations, where the integer-order differential equations fails in modeling certain issues [1]. Compared to integer order derivatives some properties of the non-integer order derivatives are very tedious to deal with. Thus, it becomes of great importance to establish more results for fractional calculus. Recently lots of researchers have proposed new and efficient analytical and numerical schemes to approximate the solutions of numerous fractional order problems. In this connection one can find efficient work done by researchers such as the analysis of fractional Drinfeld-Sokolov-Wilson model with exponential memory [2], a homotopy perturbation sumudu transform method (HPSTM) for solving fractional equal width (EW) equation [3]. The ternary-fractional differential transform method, that extends its applicability to encompass initial value problems in the fractal 3D space [1]. The local fractional homotopy perturbation Sumudu transform scheme and the local fractional reduced differential transform method for a fractal vehicular traffic flow problem [4]. The authors in [5] have proposed a numerical algorithm based on homotopic technique to examine the fractional vibration equation in Atangana-Baleanu sense. The authors in [6] have presented the efficiency of the Atangana-Baleanu (AB) derivative over Caputo-Fabrizio (CF) to some nonlinear partial differential equations. The authors in [7] have done a comparative analysis of exothermic reactions model having constant heat source in the porous media via Caputo, Caputo Fabrizio and Atangana-Baleanu theories. In [8] a hybrid numerical scheme based on the homotopy analysis transform method (HATM) to examine the fractional model of nonlinear wave-like equations having variable coefficients is presented. The Klein-Gordon is one of the most important mathematical model which finds its applications in numerous phenomenon in science and engineering. It has been applied to non linear optics, quantum field theory, Plasma physics, fluid dynamics, chemical kinetics and solid state physics [9,10,11]. In literature a lot of work has been done on solving the Klein-Gordon equation analytically some of them are the tanh and the sine-cosine methods [12], the differential transform method [13], Modified Kudryashov method [14,15], ansatz method [16], Exp(−ϕ(ϵ))-expansion method [17], and the variational iteration method [18]. The residual power series method for linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equation [19], homotopy analysis method [20,21], local fractional series expansion method [10], homotopy perturbation method [22], and the fractional Riccati expansion method [23]. In [24] a hybrid method based on local fractional Sumudu transform method and homotopy perturbation technique is employed to find the non differentiable solution of Klein-Gordon equation on Cantor sets. Since Most of the problems cannot be solved analytically so one must use numerical methods. Despite the fact that, numerical approximation of these equations are rare, in literature some excellent work is available, such as Mohebi et al utilized the Compact finite difference method [25] and the implicit RBF meshless method [26] for the approximation of linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equations. M. M. Khader [27] applied an efficient method based on the generalized laguerre polynomials for approximating the linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equations. In [28] the authors used the wavelet method for approximating a class of fractional Klein-Gordon equations. The authors in [29] proposed a numerical algorithm based on the applications of the operational matrices of the Legendre scaling functions for the approximation of fractional Klein-Gordon equation. The authors in [30] applied a high order compact finite difference scheme to two dimensional fractional Klein-Gordon equations. Dehghan et al [31] used radial basis functions to approximate the solution of non linear Klein-Gordon equations. However in these time stepping schemes the computations may be very expansive because each new iteration is dependent on the previous time step. An alternative way is to use the Laplace transform coupled with these numerical methods. In literature one can find numerous research work on the coupling of other numerical methods and Laplace transform. The Laplace transform was first coupled with the boundary integral method by Rizzo and Shippey [32]. Moridis and Reddell coupled Laplace transform with finite difference, boundary element and finite element methods [33,34,35]. In [36] the authors coupled the Galerkin method with Laplace transform. Moridis and Kansa [37] coupled multiquadric method and Laplace transform for the approximation of PDEs. In [38] the author studied RBF method coupled with Laplace transform on unit sphere. Similarly the coupling of Laplace transform with other numerical methods such as spectral method, finite difference method, boundary particle method, RBF method, and the finite element method can be found in [39,40,41,42,43,44] and the references therein. In this work we apply the idea of [45,46], the Laplace transform is coupled with local RBF method to approximate linear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equation. The Laplace transform is used to avoid the stability restrictions, which are commonly encountered in time-stepping procedure. The local radial basis function method is used to resolve the issue of ill-conditioning of the differentiation matrices and the sensitivity of shape parameter in global radial basis functions method. The main idea of the local radial basis function method is the collocation on overlapping sub-domains of the whole domain. The overlapping sub-domains remarkably reduce the size of collocation matrix by solving many small size matrices. Each small matrix has the same size as the number of nodes in the domain of influence of each node. In order to validate our method we consider linear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equation of the form [25]
βα−1∂αχ(x,t)∂tα+η∂χ(x,t)∂t+κχ(x,t)=Lχ(x,t)+βα−1f(x,t),0≤x≤L,1<α≤2,0≤t≤1,η≥0,κ≥0, | (1.1) |
with initial and boundary conditions given in (1.2) and (1.3),
χ(x,0)=f1(x),∂χ(x,t)∂t|t=0=f2(x),x∈Ω, | (1.2) |
Bχ(x,t)=h(t),x∈∂Ω. | (1.3) |
Here L and B are the governing and boundary differential operators, and ∂α∂tα is the Caputo fractional derivative of order α defined by [47]:
∂α∂tαχ(t)=1Γ(p−α)∫t0(t−s)m−α−1dmdsmχ(s)ds,m−1≤α≤m,m∈N. | (1.4) |
Let the Laplace transform of χ(t) be denoted and defined by
ˆχ(s)=L{χ(t)}=∫∞0e−stχ(t)dt, | (1.5) |
and the Laplace transform of the Caputo derivative is defined by
L{∂α∂tαχ(t)}=sαˆχ(s)−m−1∑i=0sα−i−1χ(i)(0). | (1.6) |
Here we construct a local RBF method coupled with Laplace transform for the approximation of the solution of the linear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equations. In order to avoid the time stepping procedure the Laplace transform is used to eliminate the time variable. Then the local RBF method is utilized to approximate the time independent linear PDE.
Applying the Laplace transform to Eqs (1.1) and (1.3), we get
βα−1(sαˆχ(x,s)−sα−1χ(x,0)−sα−2χt(x,0))+η(sˆχ(x,s)−χ(x,0))+κˆχ(x,s)=Lˆχ(x,s)+βα−1ˆf(x,s), | (2.1) |
thus we have the following linear system
(βα−1sαI+ηsI+κI−L)ˆχ(x,s)=ˆg(x,s),x∈Ω, | (2.2) |
Bˆχ(x,s)=h(s),x∈∂Ω, | (2.3) |
where
ˆg(x,s)=βα−1sα−1χ(x,0)+βα−1sα−2χt(x,0)+ηχ(x,0)+βα−1ˆfχ(x,s). |
In the following section the local RBF method is used to approximate the differential operator L and B in order to solve the problem (2.2)–(2.3) in Laplace space.
In local RBF method the approximation of the function ˆχ(x), for a given set of data points {ˆχ(xi):i=1,...,N}, where {xi:i=1,...,N}⊂Ω⊂Rd,d≥1 takes the form
ˆχ(xi)=∑xj∈Ωiλjϕ(‖xi−xj‖), | (2.4) |
where λi={λij:j=1,...,n} is the vector of expansion coefficients, ϕ(r),r≥0 is radial kernel and the distance between the centers xi and xj is r=‖xi−xj‖, and Ωi is a sub domain of Ω containing xi, and around xi it contains n neighboring centers. So we have N number of n×n linear systems given by
^χχi=Φiλi,i=1,2,3,...,N, | (2.5) |
the elements of the interpolation matrix Φi are bikj=ϕ(‖xk−xj‖),wherexk,xj∈Ωi, each n×n system is then solved for the unknowns λi={λij:j=1,...,n}. Next the operator Lˆχ(x), is approximated by
Lˆχ(xi)=∑xj∈ΩiλijLϕ(‖xi−xj‖), | (2.6) |
the above Eq (2.6) can be expressed as
Lˆχ(xi)=λi⋅νi, | (2.7) |
where νi is of order 1×n and λi of order n×1, the entries of νi are shown in the following equation
νi=Lϕ(‖xi−xj‖),xj∈Ωi, | (2.8) |
using Eq (2.5), the coefficients λi can be eliminated as,
λi=(Φi)−1ˆχi, | (2.9) |
using the values of λi from (2.9) in (2.7) we get,
Lˆχ(xi)=νi(Φi)−1ˆχi=wiˆχi | (2.10) |
where,
wi=νi(Φi)−1, | (2.11) |
Hence the linear differential L is approximated using the local RBF method for each center xi as
Lˆχ≡Dˆχ. | (2.12) |
The matrix D is sparse differentiation matrix which approximates the linear differential operator L. The matrix D has order N×N which contains n non-zero and N−n zero entries, where n is the number of centers in the sub domain Ωi. The same procedure can be applied to the boundary operator B.
In literature a large number of radial kernels are available. In this article we have selected the multi-quadrics ϕ(r)=√1+(rc)2 for our numerical approximation. The accuracy of the numerical solution greatly depends on the parameter c. The researchers always search for that value of c which gives an optimal solution. In this regard a large amount of work has been done such as [48,49,50] and references therein. Here we utilize the uncertainty principle [51] for optimal shape parameter c.
Algorithm:
● The interval 1012<Cond<1016 is selected for the condition number (Cond) of the system matrices of the given problem.
● Using SVD, the interpolation matrix is decomposed as R,P,Q=svd(Φi). The order of Φi is n×n (n is the number of centers in each Ωi), and the n singular values of the matrix Φi lies on the diagonal of the matrix P (P is a diagonal matrix), and the condition number of Φi is Cond=‖Φi‖‖(Φi)−1‖=max(P)min(P).
● The c is searched until the condition 1012<Cond<1016 is satisfied, the algorithm is given as
Step 1: set Cond=1
Step 2: select 1012<Cond<1016
Step 3: whileCond>CondmaxandCond<Condmin
Step 4: R,P,Q=svd(Φi)
Step 5: Cond=max(P)min(P)
Step 6: ifCond<Condmin,c=c−δc
Step 7: ifCond>Condmax,c=c+δc
c(optimal)=c.
Optimal value of the parameter c is obtained, when the above condition is satisfied, and then we can compute the inverse using (Φi)−1=(RPQT)−1=QP−1RT [52]. Hence wi in (2.11) can be computed.
Following the discretization by local RBF method of the linear differential and boundary operators L and B respectively, the system (2.2)–(2.3) is solved for each point s. Finally the solution of the problem (1.1)–(1.3) is obtained using the inverse of Laplace transform
χ(x,t)=12πi∫σ+i∞σ−i∞estˆχ(x,s)ds. | (2.13) |
In applying the Laplace transform method the calculation of inverse Laplace transform is the main difficulty. In many cases it is difficult to find the inverse Laplace transform analytically so numerical methods must be used. A large number of methods for the numerical inversion of Laplace transform have been developed. In this work we use the idea of [39,42] in which the integration is performed over a parabolic or hyperbolic path Γ, so the integral in equation (2.13) can be written as
χ(x,t)=12πi∫Γestˆχ(x,s)ds,σ>σ0, | (2.14) |
where Γ is a path of integration joining σ−i∞ to σ+i∞ and
s=s(ω), | (2.15) |
using (2.15) in (2.14), we find the following expression
χ(x,t)=12πi∫∞−∞es(ω)tˆχ(x,s(ω))ˊs(ω)dω, | (2.16) |
Finally the trapezoidal rule with uniform step size k is used to approximate (2.16), as
χk(x,t)=k2πiM∑j=−Mesjtˆχ(x,sj)ˊsj,sj=s(ωj),ωj=jk. | (2.17) |
The approximate solution of the proposed scheme is defined by Eq (2.17). The accuracy of (2.17) greatly depends on the path of the integration Γ. There are various contours available in the literature. Recently the hyperbolic [41] and parabolic [42] contours are used to approximate the integer and fractional order PDEs. In our computations the hyperbolic path due to [41] is used.
s(ω)=η+γ(1−sin(δ−ιω)),forω∈R,(Γ) | (3.1) |
where η≥0, γ>0, 12π<β<π, and 0<δ<β−12π. In fact, when we choose Imω=λ, the Eq (3.1) is reduced to the left branch of the hyperbola
(x−γ−ηγsin(δ+λ))2−(yγcos(δ+λ))2=1, | (3.2) |
transforming the strip Zr={ω:Imω≤r,r>0} into the hyperbola Ωr={s:ω∈Zr}⊃Γ. Suppose Σϕ={s≠0:|args|≤ϕ}∪0,0<ϕ<(1−α)ϕ2, and let Σηβ=η+Σβ,Γ⊂Ωr⊂Σηβ. The following theorem gives the error estimate of the scheme for the contour Γ.
Theorem 3.1 ([41], Theorem 2.1) let the solution of (1.1) be χ(x,t), with ˆf(x,t) analyitc in Σηβ. Let Γ⊂Ωr⊂Σηβ, and b>0 be defined by b=cosh−1(1θτsin(δ)), where τ=t0T, 0<θ<1, 0<t0<T, and let γ=θ¯rMbT. Then for the approximate solution defined by (2.17), with k=bM≤¯rlog2,|χ(x,t)−χk(x,t)|≤(‖χ0‖+‖ˆf(x,t)‖Σηβ)CQeητg(ρrM)e−μM, for μ=¯r(1−θ)b, ρr=θ¯rτsin(δ−r)b, g(x)=max(1,log(1x)), ¯r=2πr, r>0, C=Cδ,r,β, and t0≤t≤T. Thus the corresponding error estimate is of the order
Error Estimate=|χ(x,t)−χk(x,t)|=O(g(ρrM)e−μM). |
In order to investigate the systems (2.2)–(2.3) stability, we represent the system in discrete form as
Y^χχ=b, | (4.1) |
where Y is the sparse differentiation matrix of order N×N obtained using local RBF method. For the system (4.1) the constant of stability is given by
C=supˆχ≠0‖ˆχ‖‖Yˆχ‖, | (4.2) |
where C is finite using any discrete norm ‖.‖ on RN. From (4.2) we may write
‖Y‖−1≤‖ˆχ‖‖Yˆχ‖≤C, | (4.3) |
Similarly for the pseudoinverse Y† of Y, we can write
‖Y†‖=supv≠0‖Y†v‖‖v‖. | (4.4) |
Thus we have
‖Y†‖≥supv=Yˆχ≠0‖Y†Yˆχ‖‖Yˆχ‖=supˆχ≠0‖ˆχ‖‖Yˆχ‖=C. | (4.5) |
We can see that Eqs (4.3) and (4.5) confirms the bounds for the stability constant C. Calculating the pseudoinverse for approximating the system (4.1) numerically may be very expansive computationally, but it ensures the stability. The MATLAB's function condest can be used to estimate ‖Y−1‖∞ in case of square systems, thus we have
C=condest(Y′)‖Y‖∞ | (4.6) |
This work well with less number of computations for our sparse differentiation matrix Y. Figures 1 and 2 show the bounds for the constant C of our system (2.2)–(2.3) for Problem 3. Selecting N=50, M=80, n=15, and α=0.8 at t=1, we have 1≤C≤1.1620. It is observed that the stability constant is bounded by very small numbers, which guarantees the stability of the proposed local RBF scheme.
This section is devoted to the numerical experiments. The proposed method is tested here for 1-D time fractional order Klein-Gordon equations. The multi-quadrics radial kernels ϕ(r) = (1+(rc)2)1/2 are used in all our numerical experiments. The Uncertainty principle [51] is used to optimize the shape parameter c. The accuracy of the method is measured using L∞ error defined by
L∞=‖χ(x,t)−χk(x,t)‖∞=max1≤j≤N(|χ(x,t)−χk(x,t)|) |
is used. Here χk and χ are the numerical and exact solutions respectively.
If we use β=1, κ=1, and η=0, Eq (1.1) takes the form
∂αχ(x,t)∂tα+χ(x,t)−∂2χ(x,t)∂x2=f(x,t), | (5.1) |
where 1≤α≤2,t≥0,0≤x≤1, with zero boundary and initial conditions. The domain [0,1] is selected for the problem with exact solution
χ(x,t)=t2(e−ex)sin(x), |
and non homogeneous term
f(x,t)=2t2−α(2−α)Γ(2−α)(e−ex)sin(x)+t2(2e−ex)sin(x)+2t2excos(x). |
The MATLAB's command ω=−M:k:M is used to generate the quadrature points along the path of integration Γ. The parameters used in our computations are α=1.75,η=2,τ=t0T,r=0.1387,θ=0.1,δ=0.1541,t0=0.5andT=5. Using Eq (3.1) the remaining optimal parameters can be found for the hyperbolic path Γ. In our computations n=6 in the sub domain Ωi and N=40 in the global domain Ω are selected. The error estimates and L∞ errors are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The efficiency of the method can be seen in the results. The actual error and error estimates are shown in Figure 3 and the absolute errors for different values of α are shown in Figure 4. The numerical and the exact solutions are shown in Figures 5 and 6 respectively.
N=60, n=5 α=1.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.145896 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.158580 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.169243 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.218606 | |
40 | 6.57×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.384568 | |
50 | 1.25×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.682311 | |
60 | 9.58×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.143210 | |
70 | 9.70×10−6 | 0.0072 | 2.792846 | |
80 | 9.66×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.805704 | |
[25] 1.34×10−6 |
N=60, n=5 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.151320 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.190760 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.173974 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.275586 | |
40 | 6.35×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.483761 | |
50 | 1.19×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.732991 | |
60 | 8.99×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.269992 | |
70 | 9.11×10−6 | 0.0072 | 3.328360 | |
80 | 9.07×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.789626 | |
[25] 4.45×10−5 |
If we use β=1, κ=1, and η=1, Eq (1.1) takes the form
∂αχ(x,t)∂tα+∂χ(x,t)∂t+χ(x,t)=∂2χ(x,t)∂x2+f(x,t), | (5.2) |
where 1≤α≤2,t≥0,0≤x≤1, with zero initial and boundary conditions, the exact solution of the problem is
χ(x,t)=t2xsin(x−1), |
and non homogeneous term is
f(x,t)=2t2−α(2−α)Γ(2−α)xsin(x−1)+2txsin(x−1)+t2xsin(x−1)−t2(2cos(x−1)−xsin(x−1)). |
The MATLAB's command ω=−M:k:M is used to generate the quadrature points along the path of integration Γ. The parameters used in our computations are α=1.75,r=0.1387,δ=0.1541,θ=0.1,τ=t0T,η=2,t0=0.5andT=5. Using Eq (3.1) the remaining optimal parameters can be found for the hyperbolic path Γ. In our computations n=7 centers in the sub domain Ωi and N=50 in the global domain Ω are selected. The error estimates and L∞ errors are shown in Tables 3 and 4. Also the maximum absolute errors for different values of α are shown in Table 5, which shows the efficiency of the proposed method. The numerical and exact solutions of this problem are shown in Figures 7 and 8 respectively and plot of Actual error and Error Estimate corresponding to problem 2 are shown in Figure 9.
M=80, n=5 α=1.25 |
N | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 5.77×10−5 | 0.0024 | 0.561563 | |
20 | 1.27×10−5 | 0.0024 | 1.125699 | |
30 | 3.55×10−6 | 0.0024 | 1.252799 | |
40 | 2.43×10−6 | 0.0024 | 2.716533 | |
50 | 2.87×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.686349 | |
60 | 3.78×10−6 | 0.0024 | 6.319554 | |
80 | 8.38×10−6 | 0.0024 | 8.773851 | |
90 | 8.20×10−7 | 0.0024 | 9.862299 | |
[25] 5.91×10−7 |
N=50, n=7 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 3.32×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.146540 | |
15 | 9.63×10−4 | 2.6363 | 0.160951 | |
20 | 5.71×10−4 | 1.5582 | 0.170815 | |
30 | 6.70×10−5 | 0.5373 | 0.212776 | |
40 | 7.76×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.361477 | |
50 | 4.25×10−6 | 0.0625 | 0.585600 | |
60 | 5.48×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.047157 | |
70 | 5.42×10−6 | 0.0072 | 1.872323 | |
80 | 5.44×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.417500 | |
[25] 7.59×10−6 |
x | α=1.25 | α=1.5 | α=1.75 | α=1.95 |
0 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 |
0.1 | 1.353×10−6 | 1.340×10−6 | 1.326×10−6 | 1.315×10−6 |
0.2 | 1.155×10−6 | 1.131×10−6 | 1.104×10−6 | 1.079×10−6 |
0.3 | 9.710×10−7 | 9.400×10−7 | 9.010×10−7 | 8.630×10−7 |
0.4 | 8.170×10−7 | 7.820×10−7 | 7.360×10−7 | 6.850×10−7 |
0.5 | 6.760×10−7 | 6.410×10−7 | 5.910×10−7 | 5.320×10−7 |
0.6 | 5.180×10−7 | 4.860×10−7 | 4.370×10−7 | 3.740×10−7 |
0.7 | 3.510×10−7 | 3.240×10−7 | 2.830×10−7 | 2.220×10−7 |
0.8 | 1.620×10−7 | 1.430×10−7 | 1.130×10−7 | 6.200×10−8 |
0.9 | 1.300×10−8 | 2.300×10−8 | 3.900×10−8 | 6.800×10−8 |
1 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 |
Here we consider the 1-D linear Klein-Gordon equation of the form [19]
∂αχ(x,t)∂tα=∂2χ(x,t)∂x2+χ(x,t),0≤α≤1,t≥0,x∈R, | (5.3) |
with initial condition χ(x,0)=1+sin(x) and exact solution χ(x,t)=sin(x)+Eα(tα), where Eα(t)=∑∞m=0tmΓ(αm+1). The domain [−4,4] is selected for the given problem. The quadrature points are generated using the MATLAB's command ω=−M:k:M along the path of integration Γ. The parameters used in our computations are α=0.8,r=0.1387,η=2,τ=t0T,θ=0.1,δ=0.1541,t0=0.5andT=5. Using Eq (3.1) the remaining optimal parameters can be found for the hyperbolic path Γ. In our computations we select n=6 centers in the sub domain Ωi and N=40 in the global domain Ω are selected. The error estimates and L∞ errors are shown in Tables 6 and 7. Similar behavior is observed as in the previous examples. The numerical and exact solutions for problem 3 are shown in Figures 10 and 11 and plot of Actual error and Error Estimate corresponding to problem 3 are shown in Figure 12.
N=70, n=10, α=0.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.37×100 | 4.4187 | 0.168655 | |
20 | 4.14×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.216721 | |
30 | 3.13×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.268500 | |
40 | 9.80×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.352215 | |
50 | 1.49×10−2 | 0.0625 | 0.480307 | |
60 | 2.60×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.899249 | |
70 | 8.67×10−4 | 0.0072 | 2.037757 | |
80 | 8.90×10−4 | 0.0024 | 3.956089 | |
90 | 8.12×10−4 | 8.18×10−4 | 6.517429 |
N=40, n=6, α=0.8 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 2.68×100 | 4.4187 | 0.158384 | |
15 | 4.53×10−1 | 2.6363 | 0.162534 | |
20 | 3.36×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.162535 | |
30 | 1.59×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.189903 | |
40 | 2.0×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.245566 | |
50 | 8.70×10−3 | 0.0625 | 0.344221 | |
60 | 1.10×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.502084 | |
70 | 6.32×10−4 | 0.0072 | 0.923548 | |
80 | 5.70×10−4 | 0.0024 | 2.520403 |
In this article, we constructed a local RBF method based on Laplace transform proposed for the approximation of the solution of the linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equations. In time stepping procedure usually the time instability is encountered and for accuracy we need a very small time step size. Global RBF methods are efficient and accurate only for small amount of nodes. They become inefficient and the differentiation matrix becomes ill-conditioned for large amount of nodes. The main advantage of this method is that it avoids the time stepping procedure with the help of Laplace transform, and the local RBF method has been used to resolve the issue of ill-conditioning. The numerical results confirmed the stability and convergence of the method. The comparison of the results with other methods led us to conclude that the proposed local RBF method coupled with Laplace transform is an efficient method for approximation of the solution of the linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equations.
The authors wish to thank the referees for their careful reading of the manuscript and valuable suggestions.This work was supported in part by the National Key Research and Development Program under Grant 2018YFB0904205, in part by the Key Laboratory of Pattern Recognition and Intelligent Information Processing, Institutions of Higher Education of Sichuan Province under Grant MSSB-2020-12.
The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
[1] |
Jain IP (2009) Hydrogen the fuel for 21st century. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34: 7368–7378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.05.093 doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.05.093
![]() |
[2] |
Beghi GE (1986) A decade of research on thermochemical hydrogen at the Joint Research Centre, Ispra. Int J Hydrogen Energy 11: 761–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3199(86)90172-2 doi: 10.1016/0360-3199(86)90172-2
![]() |
[3] |
Lee BJ, No HC, Yoon HJ, et al. (2008) An optimal operating window for the Bunsen process in the I–S thermochemical cycle. Int J Hydrogen Energy 33: 2200–2210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.02.045 doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.02.045
![]() |
[4] |
Ahmed VN, Rao AS, Sujeesh S, et al. (2018) Evaluation of Bunsen reaction at elevated temperature and high pressure in continuous co-current reactor in iodine-sulfur thermochemical process. Int J Hydrogen Energy 43: 8190–8197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.03.098 doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.03.098
![]() |
[5] |
Ahmed VN, Rao AS, Sujeesh S, et al. (2017) Role of operating conditions on cross contamination of products of the Bunsen reaction in iodine-sulfur process for production of hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen Energy 42: 29101–29106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.09.133 doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.09.133
![]() |
[6] | Norman JH, Besenbruch GE, Brown LC, et al., Thermochemical water-splitting cycle, bench-scale investigations, and process engineering, final report for the period February 1977 through December 31, 1981. GA-A16713, 1982. Available from: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5063416. |
[7] | Richardson JF (2002) Coulson & Richardson's Chemical Engineering Design, Amsterdam: Elsevier. |
[8] |
Ni X (1995) A study of fluid dispersion in oscillatory flow through a baffled tube. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 64: 165–174. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.280640209 doi: 10.1002/jctb.280640209
![]() |
[9] |
Stonestreet P, Harvey AP (2002) A mixing-based design methodology for continuous oscillatory flow reactors. Chem Eng Res Des 80: 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1205/026387602753393204 doi: 10.1205/026387602753393204
![]() |
[10] |
Torab-Mostaedi M, Safdari J (2009) Mass transfer coefficients in a pulsed packed extraction column. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 48: 1321–1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2009.06.002 doi: 10.1016/j.cep.2009.06.002
![]() |
[11] |
Ni X, Mackley MR, Harvey AP (2003) Mixing through oscillations and pulsations—a guide to achieving process enhancements in the chemical and process industries. Chem Eng Res Des 81: 373–383. https://doi.org/10.1205/02638760360596928 doi: 10.1205/02638760360596928
![]() |
[12] |
McGlone T, Briggs NEB, Clark CA, et al. (2015) Oscillatory flow reactors (OFRs) for continuous manufacturing and crystallization. Org Process Res Dev 19: 1186–1202. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.oprd.5b00225 doi: 10.1021/acs.oprd.5b00225
![]() |
[13] |
Ni X, Gough P (1997) On the discussion of the dimensionless groups governing oscillatory flow in a baffled tube. Chem Eng Sci 52: 3209–3212. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(97)00104-8 doi: 10.1016/S0009-2509(97)00104-8
![]() |
[14] |
Mackley MR, Ni X (1991) Mixing and dispersion in a baffled tube for steady laminar and pulsatile flow. Chem Eng Sci 46: 3139–3151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(91)85017-R doi: 10.1016/0009-2509(91)85017-R
![]() |
[15] | Levenspiel O (1998) Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3 Eds., Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. |
[16] |
Brunold CR, Hunns JCB, Mackley MR, et al. (1989) Experimental observations on flow patterns and energy losses for oscillatory flow in ducts containing sharp edges. Chem Eng Sci 44: 1227–1244. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(89)87022-8 doi: 10.1016/0009-2509(89)87022-8
![]() |
[17] | COMSOL, COMSOL Multiphysics. COMSOL, n.d. Available from: https://doc.comsol.com/5.5/doc/com.comsol.help.comsol/COMSOL_ReferenceManual.pdf. |
[18] |
Zheng M, Mackley M (2008) The axial dispersion performance of an oscillatory flow meso-reactor with relevance to continuous flow operation. Chem Eng Sci 63: 1788–1799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2007.12.020 doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2007.12.020
![]() |
[19] | McCabe WL, Smith JC, Harriott P (1993) Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, 5 Eds., New York: McGraw-hill. |
[20] | Baird MH, Stonestreet P (1995) Energy-dissipation in oscillatory flow within a baffled tube. Chem Eng Res Des 73: 503–511. |
1. | Nehad Ali Shah, Ioannis Dassios, Jae Dong Chung, Numerical Investigation of Time-Fractional Equivalent Width Equations That Describe Hydromagnetic Waves, 2021, 13, 2073-8994, 418, 10.3390/sym13030418 | |
2. | Kamran Kamran, Zahir Shah, Poom Kumam, Nasser Aedh Alreshidi, A Meshless Method Based on the Laplace Transform for the 2D Multi-Term Time Fractional Partial Integro-Differential Equation, 2020, 8, 2227-7390, 1972, 10.3390/math8111972 | |
3. | Siraj Ahmad, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, On the Approximation of Fractal-Fractional Differential Equations Using Numerical Inverse Laplace Transform Methods, 2023, 135, 1526-1506, 2743, 10.32604/cmes.2023.023705 | |
4. | Xiao Qin, Xiaozhong Yang, Peng Lyu, A class of explicit implicit alternating difference schemes for generalized time fractional Fisher equation, 2021, 6, 2473-6988, 11449, 10.3934/math.2021663 | |
5. | Saman Hosseinzadeh, Seyed Mahdi Emadi, Seyed Mostafa Mousavi, Davood Domairry Ganji, Mathematical modeling of fractional derivatives for magnetohydrodynamic fluid flow between two parallel plates by the radial basis function method, 2022, 12, 20950349, 100350, 10.1016/j.taml.2022.100350 | |
6. | Ahmad Qazza, Aliaa Burqan, Rania Saadeh, Fahd Jarad, Application of ARA-Residual Power Series Method in Solving Systems of Fractional Differential Equations, 2022, 2022, 1563-5147, 1, 10.1155/2022/6939045 | |
7. | Hitesh Bansu, Sushil Kumar, Numerical Solution of Space-Time Fractional Klein-Gordon Equation by Radial Basis Functions and Chebyshev Polynomials, 2021, 7, 2349-5103, 10.1007/s40819-021-01139-7 | |
8. | Aliaa Burqan, Rania Saadeh, Ahmad Qazza, Shaher Momani, ARA-residual power series method for solving partial fractional differential equations, 2023, 62, 11100168, 47, 10.1016/j.aej.2022.07.022 | |
9. | A.S.V. Ravi Kanth, K. Aruna, K. Raghavendar, Hadi Rezazadeh, Mustafa Inc, Numerical solutions of nonlinear time fractional Klein-Gordon equation via natural transform decomposition method and iterative Shehu transform method, 2021, 24680133, 10.1016/j.joes.2021.12.002 | |
10. | Saman Hosseinzadeh, Seyed M. Mousavi, Seyed M. Emadi, Davood D. Ganji, Analytical assessment of the time‐space fractional bioheat transfer equation by the radial basis function method for living tissues, 2022, 51, 2688-4534, 6139, 10.1002/htj.22583 | |
11. | Abdul Ghafoor, Muhammad Fiaz, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad, Analysis of nonlinear Burgers equation with time fractional Atangana-Baleanu-Caputo derivative, 2024, 10, 24058440, e33842, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33842 | |
12. | Asmaa Baihi, Ahmed Kajouni, Khalid Hilal, Hamid Lmou, Laplace transform method for a coupled system of (p, q)-Caputo fractional differential equations, 2024, 1598-5865, 10.1007/s12190-024-02254-6 | |
13. | Aisha Subhan, Kamal Shah, Suhad Subhi Aiadi, Nabil Mlaiki, Fahad M. Alotaibi, Abdellatif Ben Makhlouf, Analysis of Volterra Integrodifferential Equations with the Fractal-Fractional Differential Operator, 2023, 2023, 1099-0526, 1, 10.1155/2023/7210126 |
N=60, n=5 α=1.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.145896 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.158580 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.169243 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.218606 | |
40 | 6.57×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.384568 | |
50 | 1.25×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.682311 | |
60 | 9.58×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.143210 | |
70 | 9.70×10−6 | 0.0072 | 2.792846 | |
80 | 9.66×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.805704 | |
[25] 1.34×10−6 |
N=60, n=5 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.151320 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.190760 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.173974 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.275586 | |
40 | 6.35×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.483761 | |
50 | 1.19×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.732991 | |
60 | 8.99×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.269992 | |
70 | 9.11×10−6 | 0.0072 | 3.328360 | |
80 | 9.07×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.789626 | |
[25] 4.45×10−5 |
M=80, n=5 α=1.25 |
N | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 5.77×10−5 | 0.0024 | 0.561563 | |
20 | 1.27×10−5 | 0.0024 | 1.125699 | |
30 | 3.55×10−6 | 0.0024 | 1.252799 | |
40 | 2.43×10−6 | 0.0024 | 2.716533 | |
50 | 2.87×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.686349 | |
60 | 3.78×10−6 | 0.0024 | 6.319554 | |
80 | 8.38×10−6 | 0.0024 | 8.773851 | |
90 | 8.20×10−7 | 0.0024 | 9.862299 | |
[25] 5.91×10−7 |
N=50, n=7 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 3.32×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.146540 | |
15 | 9.63×10−4 | 2.6363 | 0.160951 | |
20 | 5.71×10−4 | 1.5582 | 0.170815 | |
30 | 6.70×10−5 | 0.5373 | 0.212776 | |
40 | 7.76×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.361477 | |
50 | 4.25×10−6 | 0.0625 | 0.585600 | |
60 | 5.48×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.047157 | |
70 | 5.42×10−6 | 0.0072 | 1.872323 | |
80 | 5.44×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.417500 | |
[25] 7.59×10−6 |
x | α=1.25 | α=1.5 | α=1.75 | α=1.95 |
0 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 |
0.1 | 1.353×10−6 | 1.340×10−6 | 1.326×10−6 | 1.315×10−6 |
0.2 | 1.155×10−6 | 1.131×10−6 | 1.104×10−6 | 1.079×10−6 |
0.3 | 9.710×10−7 | 9.400×10−7 | 9.010×10−7 | 8.630×10−7 |
0.4 | 8.170×10−7 | 7.820×10−7 | 7.360×10−7 | 6.850×10−7 |
0.5 | 6.760×10−7 | 6.410×10−7 | 5.910×10−7 | 5.320×10−7 |
0.6 | 5.180×10−7 | 4.860×10−7 | 4.370×10−7 | 3.740×10−7 |
0.7 | 3.510×10−7 | 3.240×10−7 | 2.830×10−7 | 2.220×10−7 |
0.8 | 1.620×10−7 | 1.430×10−7 | 1.130×10−7 | 6.200×10−8 |
0.9 | 1.300×10−8 | 2.300×10−8 | 3.900×10−8 | 6.800×10−8 |
1 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 |
N=70, n=10, α=0.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.37×100 | 4.4187 | 0.168655 | |
20 | 4.14×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.216721 | |
30 | 3.13×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.268500 | |
40 | 9.80×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.352215 | |
50 | 1.49×10−2 | 0.0625 | 0.480307 | |
60 | 2.60×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.899249 | |
70 | 8.67×10−4 | 0.0072 | 2.037757 | |
80 | 8.90×10−4 | 0.0024 | 3.956089 | |
90 | 8.12×10−4 | 8.18×10−4 | 6.517429 |
N=40, n=6, α=0.8 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 2.68×100 | 4.4187 | 0.158384 | |
15 | 4.53×10−1 | 2.6363 | 0.162534 | |
20 | 3.36×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.162535 | |
30 | 1.59×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.189903 | |
40 | 2.0×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.245566 | |
50 | 8.70×10−3 | 0.0625 | 0.344221 | |
60 | 1.10×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.502084 | |
70 | 6.32×10−4 | 0.0072 | 0.923548 | |
80 | 5.70×10−4 | 0.0024 | 2.520403 |
N=60, n=5 α=1.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.145896 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.158580 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.169243 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.218606 | |
40 | 6.57×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.384568 | |
50 | 1.25×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.682311 | |
60 | 9.58×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.143210 | |
70 | 9.70×10−6 | 0.0072 | 2.792846 | |
80 | 9.66×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.805704 | |
[25] 1.34×10−6 |
N=60, n=5 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.65×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.151320 | |
15 | 2.30×10−3 | 2.6363 | 0.190760 | |
20 | 1.30×10−3 | 1.5582 | 0.173974 | |
30 | 1.38×10−4 | 0.5373 | 0.275586 | |
40 | 6.35×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.483761 | |
50 | 1.19×10−5 | 0.0625 | 0.732991 | |
60 | 8.99×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.269992 | |
70 | 9.11×10−6 | 0.0072 | 3.328360 | |
80 | 9.07×10−6 | 0.0024 | 5.789626 | |
[25] 4.45×10−5 |
M=80, n=5 α=1.25 |
N | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 5.77×10−5 | 0.0024 | 0.561563 | |
20 | 1.27×10−5 | 0.0024 | 1.125699 | |
30 | 3.55×10−6 | 0.0024 | 1.252799 | |
40 | 2.43×10−6 | 0.0024 | 2.716533 | |
50 | 2.87×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.686349 | |
60 | 3.78×10−6 | 0.0024 | 6.319554 | |
80 | 8.38×10−6 | 0.0024 | 8.773851 | |
90 | 8.20×10−7 | 0.0024 | 9.862299 | |
[25] 5.91×10−7 |
N=50, n=7 α=1.75 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 3.32×10−4 | 4.4187 | 0.146540 | |
15 | 9.63×10−4 | 2.6363 | 0.160951 | |
20 | 5.71×10−4 | 1.5582 | 0.170815 | |
30 | 6.70×10−5 | 0.5373 | 0.212776 | |
40 | 7.76×10−6 | 0.1836 | 0.361477 | |
50 | 4.25×10−6 | 0.0625 | 0.585600 | |
60 | 5.48×10−6 | 0.0212 | 1.047157 | |
70 | 5.42×10−6 | 0.0072 | 1.872323 | |
80 | 5.44×10−6 | 0.0024 | 4.417500 | |
[25] 7.59×10−6 |
x | α=1.25 | α=1.5 | α=1.75 | α=1.95 |
0 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 | 1.463×10−6 |
0.1 | 1.353×10−6 | 1.340×10−6 | 1.326×10−6 | 1.315×10−6 |
0.2 | 1.155×10−6 | 1.131×10−6 | 1.104×10−6 | 1.079×10−6 |
0.3 | 9.710×10−7 | 9.400×10−7 | 9.010×10−7 | 8.630×10−7 |
0.4 | 8.170×10−7 | 7.820×10−7 | 7.360×10−7 | 6.850×10−7 |
0.5 | 6.760×10−7 | 6.410×10−7 | 5.910×10−7 | 5.320×10−7 |
0.6 | 5.180×10−7 | 4.860×10−7 | 4.370×10−7 | 3.740×10−7 |
0.7 | 3.510×10−7 | 3.240×10−7 | 2.830×10−7 | 2.220×10−7 |
0.8 | 1.620×10−7 | 1.430×10−7 | 1.130×10−7 | 6.200×10−8 |
0.9 | 1.300×10−8 | 2.300×10−8 | 3.900×10−8 | 6.800×10−8 |
1 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 | 3.590×10−7 |
N=70, n=10, α=0.25 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 7.37×100 | 4.4187 | 0.168655 | |
20 | 4.14×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.216721 | |
30 | 3.13×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.268500 | |
40 | 9.80×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.352215 | |
50 | 1.49×10−2 | 0.0625 | 0.480307 | |
60 | 2.60×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.899249 | |
70 | 8.67×10−4 | 0.0072 | 2.037757 | |
80 | 8.90×10−4 | 0.0024 | 3.956089 | |
90 | 8.12×10−4 | 8.18×10−4 | 6.517429 |
N=40, n=6, α=0.8 |
M | L∞ Error (Γ) | Error Estimate (Γ) | CPU time(s) |
10 | 2.68×100 | 4.4187 | 0.158384 | |
15 | 4.53×10−1 | 2.6363 | 0.162534 | |
20 | 3.36×10−1 | 1.5582 | 0.162535 | |
30 | 1.59×10−1 | 0.5373 | 0.189903 | |
40 | 2.0×10−3 | 0.1836 | 0.245566 | |
50 | 8.70×10−3 | 0.0625 | 0.344221 | |
60 | 1.10×10−3 | 0.0212 | 0.502084 | |
70 | 6.32×10−4 | 0.0072 | 0.923548 | |
80 | 5.70×10−4 | 0.0024 | 2.520403 |