American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

October  2020, 13(10): 2641-2654. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020223

Local meshless differential quadrature collocation method for time-fractional PDEs

 1 Department of Mathematics, University of Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 23430, Pakistan 2 Department of Basic Sciences, University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar, Pakistan 3 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Women University, Peshawar, Pakistan

* Corresponding authors: siraj.islam@gmail.com (Siraj-ul-Islam)

* Corresponding authors: imtiazkakakhil@gmail.com (Imtiaz Ahmad)

Received  February 2019 Revised  July 2019 Published  December 2019

This paper is concerned with the numerical solution of time- fractional partial differential equations (PDEs) via local meshless differential quadrature collocation method (LMM) using radial basis functions (RBFs). For the sake of comparison, global version of the meshless method is also considered. The meshless methods do not need mesh and approximate solution on scattered and uniform nodes in the domain. The local and global meshless procedures are used for spatial discretization. Caputo derivative is used in the temporal direction for both the values of $\alpha \in (0,1)$ and $\alpha\in(1,2)$. To circumvent spurious oscillation casued by convection, an upwind technique is coupled with the LMM. Numerical analysis is given to asses accuracy of the proposed meshless method for one- and two-dimensional problems on rectangular and non-rectangular domains.

Citation: Imtiaz Ahmad, Siraj-ul-Islam, Mehnaz, Sakhi Zaman. Local meshless differential quadrature collocation method for time-fractional PDEs. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020, 13 (10) : 2641-2654. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020223
References:

show all references

References:
Schematics of central local supported domain in 2D geometry for $n_i = 5$
Schematic of upwind local supported domain in 1D (row 1) and 2D (row 2) geometry for $n_i = 3$ and $n_i = 5$ respectively
Numerical solutions of the GMM for Test Problem 2
Numerical solutions of the LMM with out upwind technique (left), with upwind technique (right) for Test Problem 2
Numerical solutions of the LMM with upwind technique for Test Problem 2
Computational domain and absolute error for Test Problem 3
Computational domain and absolute error for Test Problem 3
Computational domain and absolute error for Test Problem 3
Computational domain and numerical solution for Test Problem 3
Computational domain, approximate and exact solution for Test Problem 3
Numerical solution of the GMM for $Re = 200$ (left) and $Re = 300$ (right) for Test Problem 4
Numerical solution of the LMM for $Re = 100$ (left) and $Re = 150$ (right) for Test Problem 4
Results of the LMM using upwind technique for $Re = 150$ (left) and $Re = 1000$ (right) for Test Problem 4
Results of the LMM using upwind technique for $Re = 10^{10}$ (left) and $Re = 10^{17}$ (right) for Test Problem 4
CPU time comparison of the LMM and the GMM for Test Problem 4
Comparison of the LMM with different local sub-domain $n_i$ and the method reported in [8] for Test Problem 1
 Time t=1 t=2 t=2.5 t=3 Max. abs. error[8] 4.632e-03 5.267e-03 5.569e-03 5.857e-03 LMM ($L_{\infty}$) $n_i=3$ 3.6104e-04 6.3774e-04 7.8362e-04 9.2358e-04 $n_i=5$ 1.6807e-05 2.5918e-05 2.8962e-05 3.3891e-05 $n_i=7$ 7.4546e-06 1.1882e-05 1.3669e-05 1.5306e-05 $n_i=9$ 6.5724e-06 1.0753e-05 1.2321e-05 1.3640e-05 $n_i=11$ 6.4933e-06 1.0749e-05 1.2303e-05 1.3355e-05
 Time t=1 t=2 t=2.5 t=3 Max. abs. error[8] 4.632e-03 5.267e-03 5.569e-03 5.857e-03 LMM ($L_{\infty}$) $n_i=3$ 3.6104e-04 6.3774e-04 7.8362e-04 9.2358e-04 $n_i=5$ 1.6807e-05 2.5918e-05 2.8962e-05 3.3891e-05 $n_i=7$ 7.4546e-06 1.1882e-05 1.3669e-05 1.5306e-05 $n_i=9$ 6.5724e-06 1.0753e-05 1.2321e-05 1.3640e-05 $n_i=11$ 6.4933e-06 1.0749e-05 1.2303e-05 1.3355e-05
$Ave.L_{abs}$ error norms of the LMM for Test Problem 3
 N 5 10 15 20 $\alpha=1.5$ 0.0027911 0.00033331 6.3412e-05 1.1145e-05 $\alpha=1.8$ 0.0028124 0.0003587 8.4685e-05 2.7917e-05
 N 5 10 15 20 $\alpha=1.5$ 0.0027911 0.00033331 6.3412e-05 1.1145e-05 $\alpha=1.8$ 0.0028124 0.0003587 8.4685e-05 2.7917e-05
Numerical results of the LMM and the method reported in [28] for Test Problem 3
 $\alpha=1.5$ $\alpha=1.8$ $\tau$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ [28] $\tau$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ [28] 1/10 4.3826e-02 1.2550e-02 1/10 2.9099e-02 2.0496e-02 1/20 1.2592e-02 6.6277e-03 1/20 9.2610e-03 1.0696e-02 1/30 6.3054e-03 4.5292e-03 1/30 4.4599e-03 7.2811e-03 1/40 3.5999e-03 3.4518e-03 1/40 2.3587e-03 5.5407e-03 1/50 2.1402e-03 2.7951e-03 1/50 1.1993e-03 4.4822e-03 1/60 1.2811e-03 2.3526e-03 1/60 5.8970e-04 3.7688e-03 1/70 8.3729e-04 2.0338e-03 1/70 4.7926e-04 3.2548e-03
 $\alpha=1.5$ $\alpha=1.8$ $\tau$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ [28] $\tau$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ $Ave.L_{abs}$ [28] 1/10 4.3826e-02 1.2550e-02 1/10 2.9099e-02 2.0496e-02 1/20 1.2592e-02 6.6277e-03 1/20 9.2610e-03 1.0696e-02 1/30 6.3054e-03 4.5292e-03 1/30 4.4599e-03 7.2811e-03 1/40 3.5999e-03 3.4518e-03 1/40 2.3587e-03 5.5407e-03 1/50 2.1402e-03 2.7951e-03 1/50 1.1993e-03 4.4822e-03 1/60 1.2811e-03 2.3526e-03 1/60 5.8970e-04 3.7688e-03 1/70 8.3729e-04 2.0338e-03 1/70 4.7926e-04 3.2548e-03
$Ave.L_{abs}$ of the LMM for Test Problem 3
 $\alpha$ Regular nodes Chebyshev nodes Explicit CN Implicit Explicit CN Implicit 1.5 8.0527e-05 2.2050e-04 4.1275e-04 2.4177e-04 3.4777e-04 4.5997e-04 1.6 8.1357e-05 2.2263e-04 4.1881e-04 2.3932e-04 3.4587e-04 4.5902e-04 1.7 8.2287e-05 2.2266e-04 4.2312e-04 2.3691e-04 3.4459e-04 4.5928e-04 1.8 8.3535e-05 2.2109e-04 4.2679e-04 2.3405e-04 3.4367e-04 4.6080e-04
 $\alpha$ Regular nodes Chebyshev nodes Explicit CN Implicit Explicit CN Implicit 1.5 8.0527e-05 2.2050e-04 4.1275e-04 2.4177e-04 3.4777e-04 4.5997e-04 1.6 8.1357e-05 2.2263e-04 4.1881e-04 2.3932e-04 3.4587e-04 4.5902e-04 1.7 8.2287e-05 2.2266e-04 4.2312e-04 2.3691e-04 3.4459e-04 4.5928e-04 1.8 8.3535e-05 2.2109e-04 4.2679e-04 2.3405e-04 3.4367e-04 4.6080e-04
 [1] Oleg Yu. Imanuvilov, Jean Pierre Puel. On global controllability of 2-D Burgers equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2009, 23 (1&2) : 299-313. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.23.299 [2] Olivier Ley, Erwin Topp, Miguel Yangari. Some results for the large time behavior of Hamilton-Jacobi equations with Caputo time derivative. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcds.2021007 [3] Taige Wang, Bing-Yu Zhang. Forced oscillation of viscous Burgers' equation with a time-periodic force. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021, 26 (2) : 1205-1221. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020160 [4] Joel Kübler, Tobias Weth. Spectral asymptotics of radial solutions and nonradial bifurcation for the Hénon equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2020, 40 (6) : 3629-3656. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020032 [5] S. Sadeghi, H. Jafari, S. Nemati. Solving fractional Advection-diffusion equation using Genocchi operational matrix based on Atangana-Baleanu derivative. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020435 [6] Lihong Zhang, Wenwen Hou, Bashir Ahmad, Guotao Wang. Radial symmetry for logarithmic Choquard equation involving a generalized tempered fractional $p$-Laplacian. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020445 [7] Min Xi, Wenyu Sun, Jun Chen. Survey of derivative-free optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2020, 10 (4) : 537-555. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020050 [8] Leilei Wei, Yinnian He. A fully discrete local discontinuous Galerkin method with the generalized numerical flux to solve the tempered fractional reaction-diffusion equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020319 [9] Abdollah Borhanifar, Maria Alessandra Ragusa, Sohrab Valizadeh. High-order numerical method for two-dimensional Riesz space fractional advection-dispersion equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020355 [10] Maika Goto, Kazunori Kuwana, Yasuhide Uegata, Shigetoshi Yazaki. A method how to determine parameters arising in a smoldering evolution equation by image segmentation for experiment's movies. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021, 14 (3) : 881-891. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020233 [11] Nguyen Huy Tuan, Vo Van Au, Runzhang Xu. Semilinear Caputo time-fractional pseudo-parabolic equations. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020282 [12] Bimal Mandal, Aditi Kar Gangopadhyay. A note on generalization of bent boolean functions. Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 2021, 15 (2) : 329-346. doi: 10.3934/amc.2020069 [13] Andreas Koutsogiannis. Multiple ergodic averages for tempered functions. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2021, 41 (3) : 1177-1205. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020314 [14] Mokhtar Bouloudene, Manar A. Alqudah, Fahd Jarad, Yassine Adjabi, Thabet Abdeljawad. Nonlinear singular $p$ -Laplacian boundary value problems in the frame of conformable derivative. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020442 [15] Biao Zeng. Existence results for fractional impulsive delay feedback control systems with Caputo fractional derivatives. Evolution Equations & Control Theory, 2021  doi: 10.3934/eect.2021001 [16] Zedong Yang, Guotao Wang, Ravi P. Agarwal, Haiyong Xu. Existence and nonexistence of entire positive radial solutions for a class of Schrödinger elliptic systems involving a nonlinear operator. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020436 [17] Kai Yang. Scattering of the focusing energy-critical NLS with inverse square potential in the radial case. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2021, 20 (1) : 77-99. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020258 [18] Norman Noguera, Ademir Pastor. Scattering of radial solutions for quadratic-type Schrödinger systems in dimension five. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcds.2021018 [19] Huu-Quang Nguyen, Ya-Chi Chu, Ruey-Lin Sheu. On the convexity for the range set of two quadratic functions. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020169 [20] Xinpeng Wang, Bingo Wing-Kuen Ling, Wei-Chao Kuang, Zhijing Yang. Orthogonal intrinsic mode functions via optimization approach. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (1) : 51-66. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019098

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233