- About this Journal ·
- Abstracting and Indexing ·
- Aims and Scope ·
- Article Processing Charges ·
- Articles in Press ·
- Author Guidelines ·
- Bibliographic Information ·
- Citations to this Journal ·
- Contact Information ·
- Editorial Board ·
- Editorial Workflow ·
- Free eTOC Alerts ·
- Publication Ethics ·
- Reviewers Acknowledgment ·
- Submit a Manuscript ·
- Subscription Information ·
- Table of Contents
Advances in Mathematical Physics
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 217393, 11 pages
Two Conservative Difference Schemes for Rosenau-Kawahara Equation
1School of Mathematics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, China
2School of Mathematics and Computer Engineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China
Received 14 September 2013; Revised 22 December 2013; Accepted 7 January 2014; Published 18 March 2014
Academic Editor: Ricardo Weder
Copyright © 2014 Jinsong Hu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Two conservative finite difference schemes for the numerical solution of the initialboundary value problem of Rosenau-Kawahara equation are proposed. The difference schemes simulate two conservative quantities of the problem well. The existence and uniqueness of the difference solution are proved. It is shown that the finite difference schemes are of second-order convergence and unconditionally stable. Numerical experiments verify the theoretical results.
In the study of compact discrete systems, the wave-wave and wave-wall interactions cannot be described by the well-known KdV equation. To overcome this shortcoming of KdV equation, Rosenau proposed the following so-called Rosenau equation in [1, 2]: which is usually used to describe the dense discrete system and simulate the long-chain transmission model through an L-C flow in radio and computer fields. Park proved the existence and uniqueness of solution to (1) in . However, it is difficult to find its analytical solution. Therefore, the numerical study of (1) is very significant and attract many scholars (see, e.g., [4–10]).
As the further consideration of nonlinear wave, Zuo obtained Rosenau-Kawahara equation by adding viscous term and to Rosenau equation (1) and studied the solitary solution and periodic solution of this equation in . In , Labidi and Biswas got the integral of Rosenau-Kawahara equation by using He’s principle. Then the solitary solution and two invariance of a generalized Rosenau-Kawahara equation are investigated in . To our best knowledge, there is no study on the numerical method of Rosenau-Kawahara equation. Therefore, we will study the difference approximate solution of Rosenau-Kawahara equation with the initial data and boundary conditions as follows: where is a known constant and is a smooth function. When , the solitary wave solution of (2) is (see ) The initial boundary value problem (2)–(4) is in accordance with the Cauchy problem of (2) when , . Hence, the boundary condition (4) is reasonable. It is easy to verify that (2)-(4) satisfy the following conservative quantities (see ): where , are both constants only depending on initial data.
It is well known that a reasonable difference scheme has not only high-accuracy but also can maintain some physical properties of original problem. Lots of numerical experiments show that conservative difference scheme can simulate the conservative law of initial problem well since it could avoid the nonlinear blow-up [13–24]. Moreover, it is suitable to compute for long-time. Li and Vu-Quoc pointed in  that in some areas, the ability to preserve some invariant properties of the original differential equation is a criterion to judge the success of a numerical simulation. Therefore, constructing the conservative difference scheme is a significant job.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. We respectively propose a two-level nonlinear Crank-Nicolson difference scheme and three-level linear difference scheme for initial boundary value problems (2)–(4) in Sections 2 and 3. We analyze its two discrete conservative laws. The existence and uniqueness of the difference solution are proved. It is shown that the finite difference schemes are of second-order convergence and unconditionally stable. In Section 4, we verify our theoretical analysis by numerical experiments.
2. Nonlinear Crank-Nicolson Conservative Difference Scheme
In this section, we propose a two-level nonlinear Crank-Nicolson difference scheme and give the theoretical analysis.
In the rest of this paper, denotes a general positive constant which may denote different value in different occurrence.
2.1. Nonlinear Difference Scheme and Its Conservative Law
Let and be the uniform step size in the spatial and temporal direction, respectively. The interval is divided into equal parts, where is a fixed positive integer. Denote , , . Let be the difference approximation of at , that is, . Denote . We define the difference operators, inner product, and norms that will be used in this paper as follows: Consider the following finite difference scheme for problems (2)–(4): The discrete boundary condition (11) is reasonable from the boundary condition (4).
Lemma 1. For any two discrete functions , we have from summation by parts (see ). Thus, And if , then
Proof. Multiplying in the two sides of (9) and summing up for from to , from boundary (11) and Lemma 1, we obtain
From the definition of , (15) is deduced from (17).
Taking the inner of (9) with (i.e., ), from boundary (11) and Lemma 1, we get where . On the other hand, Substituting (19)–(22) into (18), we get From the definition of , we get (16) by deducing (23).
2.2. Solvability of the Difference Scheme
In order to prove the solvability of difference scheme, we present the following Brouwer fixed point theorem .
Lemma 3 (Brouwer fixed point theorem). Let be a finite dimensional inner product space; suppose that is continuous and there exists an such that for all with . Then there exists such that and .
Proof. We use the mathematical induction to prove our theorem.
Suppose that there exist that satisfy difference scheme (9) for . Next we prove that there exists that satisfies difference scheme.
Let be an operator on defined by Taking the inner product of (24) with , and noticing that we have
Therefore, for any , if , then . From Lemma 3, there exists such that . Choose . It is easy to verify that satisfies difference scheme (9).
2.3. Convergence, Stability, and Uniqueness of Solution
Proof. It follows from (7) that Using Hölder inequality and Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we can get Thus, which also yields , from Sobolev inequality.
Lemma 6 (discrete Sobolev inequality ). There exist constants and such that
Lemma 7 (discrete Gronwall inequality ). Assume that , are nonnegative gridding functions, and is increasing. If , and for any then for any
Proof. Subtracting (9)–(11) from (27)–(29) and denoting , we have Taking the inner product of (40) with , we get Similar to (19)–(21), we have So, (43) can be rewritten as As from Lemma 5 and Theorem 8, we obtain Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we have On the other hand, Substituting (48) and (49) into (45), we get Similar to the deduction process of (38), one can get Therefore, (50) is changed into Denoting , (52) is equivalent to that is, Choosing sufficiently small such that , we get Summing up (55) from to , we get Noticing that and . we have From Lemma 7, we get that is, Noticing equality (51), one can obtain From Lemma 6, we have
Similar to Theorem 10, we have the following theorems.
3. A Linear Conservative Difference Scheme
3.1. Linear Difference Scheme and Its Conservative Law
Proof. Multiplying in both sides of (63) and summing up for , from boundary (65) and Lemma 1, we obtain
From the definition of , (66) is deduced from (68) and (69).
Taking the inner product of (63) with , from boundary (65) and Lemma 1, we obtain where . On the other hand, Substituting (71)–(74) into (70), we obtain From the definition of , we get (67) by deducing (75).
3.2. Solvability of the Difference Scheme
Proof. Use the mathematical induction to prove it. It is obvious that is uniquely determined by the initial condition (64). We also can get by (9)–(11). Now suppose is solved uniquely. Consider the equation of (63) for Taking the inner product of (76) with , from boundary condition (65) and Lemma 1, we get Similar to (71)–(73), we have Notice that Substituting (78)–(81) into (77), we get that is, (76) only admits zero solution. Therefore, there exists a unique that satisfies (63).
3.3. Convergence and Stability of the Difference Scheme
Proof. Subtracting (63)–(65) from (83)–(85) and letting , we have Taking the inner product of the two sides of (88) with , and using boundary condition (90) and Lemma 1, we obtain Similar to (71)–(73), we have Then (91) is changed into By Lemma 5 and Theorem 14, it is shown that Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we have On the other hand, Substituting (95)-(96) into (93), we could obtain Using the deduce process which is similar to (38), we have Then (97) is changed into Let , (99) can be rewritten as follows: that is, By choosing that is small enough such that , then Summing up (102) from to , we obtain Notice that Firstly by selecting other two-level scheme with second-order convergence (such as the scheme (9)–(11)) to get , we have Therefore Using Lemma 7,we obtain that is, Combining with (98), we get Then by Lemma 6, it is shown that
4. Numerical Simulations
In this section, let , , , , and We denote the nonlinear Crank-Nicolson conservative difference schemes (9)–(11) as Scheme I and the linear three-level conservative difference schemes (63)–(65) as Scheme II. For some different values of and , we list errors of Scheme I and Scheme II at several different time in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. We verify the two-order accuracy of the difference scheme in Tables 3 and 4 by using the method of [26, 27]. The numerical simulation of two conservative quantities (6) and (7) is listed in Tables 5 and 6.
Numerical simulations show that the finite difference Schemes I and II in this paper are efficient. The calculation results of Scheme I are slightly better than Scheme II. But iterative numerical calculation is not required, Scheme II can save computing time.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11171239), Open Fund of Key Laboratory of Mountain Hazards and Earth Surface Processes, CAS and Scientific Research Found of Sichuan Provincial Education Department (no. 11ZB009).
- P. Rosenau, “A quasi-continuous description of a nonlinear transmission line,” Physica Scripta, vol. 34, pp. 827–829, 1986.
- P. Rosenau, “Dynamics of dense discrete systems,” Progress of Theoretical Physics, vol. 79, pp. 1028–1042, 1988.
- M. A. Park, “On the Rosenau equation,” Matemática Aplicada e Computacional, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 145–152, 1990.
- S. K. Chung and S. N. Ha, “Finite element Galerkin solutions for the Rosenau equation,” Applicable Analysis, vol. 54, no. 1-2, pp. 39–56, 1994.
- K. Omrani, F. Abidi, T. Achouri, and N. Khiari, “A new conservative finite difference scheme for the Rosenau equation,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 201, no. 1-2, pp. 35–43, 2008.
- S. K. Chung, “Finite difference approximate solutions for the Rosenau equation,” Applicable Analysis, vol. 69, no. 1-2, pp. 149–156, 1998.
- S. K. Chung and A. K. Pani, “Numerical methods for the Rosenau equation,” Applicable Analysis, vol. 77, no. 3-4, pp. 351–369, 2001.
- S. A. V. Manickam, A. K. Pani, and S. K. Chung, “A second-order splitting combined with orthogonal cubic spline collocation method for the Rosenau equation,” Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 695–716, 1998.
- Y. D. Kim and H. Y. Lee, “The convergence of finite element Galerkin solution for the Roseneau equation,” The Korean Journal of Computational & Applied Mathematics, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 171–180, 1998.
- J.-M. Zuo, “Solitons and periodic solutions for the Rosenau-KdV and Rosenau-Kawahara equations,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 215, no. 2, pp. 835–840, 2009.
- M. Labidi and A. Biswas, “Application of He’s principles to Rosenau-Kawahara equation,” Mathematics in Engineering, Science and Aerospace MESA, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 183–197, 2011.
- A. Biswas, H. Triki, and M. Labidi, “Bright and dark solitons of the Rosenau-Kawahara equation with power law nonlinearity,” Physics of Wave Phenomena, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 24–29, 2011.
- T. Wang, L. Zhang, and F. Chen, “Conservative schemes for the symmetric regularized long wave equations,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 190, no. 2, pp. 1063–1080, 2007.
- S. Li and L. Vu-Quoc, “Finite difference calculus invariant structure of a class of algorithms for the nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation,” SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1839–1875, 1995.
- Q. Chang, E. Jia, and W. Sun, “Difference schemes for solving the generalized nonlinear Schrödinger equation,” Journal of Computational Physics, vol. 148, no. 2, pp. 397–415, 1999.
- T.-C. Wang and L.-M. Zhang, “Analysis of some new conservative schemes for nonlinear Schrödinger equation with wave operator,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 182, no. 2, pp. 1780–1794, 2006.
- T. Wang, B. Guo, and L. Zhang, “New conservative difference schemes for a coupled nonlinear Schrödinger system,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 217, no. 4, pp. 1604–1619, 2010.
- L. Zhang, “A finite difference scheme for generalized regularized long-wave equation,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 168, no. 2, pp. 962–972, 2005.
- Z. Fei and L. Vázquez, “Two energy conserving numerical schemes for the sine-Gordon equation,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 17–30, 1991.
- Y. S. Wong, Q. Chang, and L. Gong, “An initial-boundary value problem of a nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 77–93, 1997.
- Q. S. Chang, B. L. Guo, and H. Jiang, “Finite difference method for generalized Zakharov equations,” Mathematics of Computation, vol. 64, no. 210, pp. 537–553, 1995.
- J. Hu and K. Zheng, “Two conservative difference schemes for the generalized Rosenau equation,” Boundary Value Problems, vol. 2010, Article ID 543503, 18 pages, 2010.
- X. Pan and L. Zhang, “On the convergence of a conservative numerical scheme for the usual Rosenau-RLW equation,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 3371–3378, 2012.
- X. Pan and L. Zhang, “Numerical simulation for general Rosenau-RLW equation: an average linearized conservative scheme,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2012, Article ID 517818, 15 pages, 2012.
- F. E. Browder, “Existence and uniqueness theorems for solutions of nonlinear boundary value problems,” in Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, vol. 17, pp. 24–49, 1965.
- T. Wang and B. Guo, “A robust semi-explicit difference scheme for the Kuramoto-Tsuzuki equation,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 233, no. 4, pp. 878–888, 2009.
- J. Hu, B. Hu, and Y. Xu, “C-N difference schemes for dissipative symmetric regularized long wave equations with damping term,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2011, Article ID 651642, 16 pages, 2011.