Numerical Method For Engineers-Chapter 8

1
CHAPTER 8
8.1 Ideal gas law:
13.12864
5 . 2
) 400 ( 082054 . 0

p
RT
v
van der Waals equation:
Determine the root of
RT b v
v
a
p v f
,
_
+ ) ( ) (
2
) 400 ( 082054 . 0 ) 08407 . 0 (
02 . 12
5 . 2 ) (
2

,
_
+ v
v
v f
Any of the techniques in Chaps 5 or 6 can be used to determine the root as v = 12.8407
L/mol. The Newton-Raphson method would be a good choice because (a) the equation is
relatively simple to differentiate and (b) the ideal gas law provides a good initial guess. The
Newton-Raphson method can be formulated as
3 2
2
1
2
) (
) (
i
i
i
i
i
i i
v
a
b v
v
a
p
RT b v
v
a
p
v v

,
_
,
_
+

+
Using the ideal gas law for the initial guess results in an accurate root determination in a few
iterations:
i xi f(xi) f'(xi) a
0 13.12864 0.699518 2.431156
1 12.84091 0.000441 2.428057 2.2407%
2 12.84073 1.84E-10 2.428055 0.0014%
3 12.84073 0 2.428055 0.0000%
8.2 The function to be solved is
0
)] 1 ( 1 [
1
) 1 (
) 1 ( 1
ln ) (
+
+
Af Af
Af
X R R
R
X R
X R
R f
or substituting XAf = 0.95,
PROPRIETARY MATERIAL. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this Manual may
be displayed, reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the
publisher, or used beyond the limited distribution to teachers and educators permitted by McGraw-Hill for their individual
course preparation. If you are a student using this Manual, you are using it without permission.
2
0
) 05 . 0 1 (
1
) 05 . 0 (
05 . 0 1
ln ) (
+
+
R R
R
R
R
R f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about R = 0.3
-6
-4
-2
0
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Bisection with initial guesses of 0.01 and 1 can be used to determine a root of 0.30715 after
16 iterations with a = 0.005%.
0 04 . 0
2
7
1
) (
+
x x
x
x f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about x = 0.02.
-0.1
0
0.1
0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Because the function is so linear, false position is a good choice. Using initial guesses of 0.01
and 0.03, the first iteration is
020964 . 0
017432 . 0 02115 . 0
) 03 . 0 01 . 0 ( 017432 . 0
03 . 0

r
x
After 3 iterations, the result is 0.021041 with a = 0.003%.
( ) 0 2 . 10 5 1 12 ) (
04 . 0 04 . 0
+
t t
e e t f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about t = 34.
3
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
Bisection with initial guesses of 0 and 50 can be used to determine a root of 33.95309 after 16
iterations with a = 0.002%.
0 016 . 0
) 28 ( ) 2 42 (
) 4 (
) (
2

+
x x
x
x f
(a) A plot of the function indicates a root at about x = 16.
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 5 10 15 20
(b) The shape of the function indicates that false position would be a poor choice (recall Fig.
5.14). Bisection with initial guesses of 0 and 20 can be used to determine a root of 15.85938
after 8 iterations with a = 0.493%. Note that false position would have required 68 iterations
to attain comparable accuracy.
i xl xu xr f(xl) f(xr)
f(xl) f(xr
) a
1 0 20 10 -0.01592 -0.01439 0.000229 100.000%
2 10 20 15 -0.01439 -0.00585 8.42E-05 33.333%
3 15 20 17.5 -0.00585 0.025788 -0.00015 14.286%
4 15 17.5 16.25 -0.00585 0.003096 -1.8E-05 7.692%
5 15 16.25 15.625 -0.00585 -0.00228 1.33E-05 4.000%
6 15.625 16.25 15.9375 -0.00228 0.000123 -2.8E-07 1.961%
7 15.625 15.9375 15.78125 -0.00228 -0.00114 2.59E-06 0.990%
8 15.78125 15.9375 15.85938 -0.00114 -0.00052 5.98E-07 0.493%
8.6 The functions to be solved are
4
) ( ) 2 (
) (
1 0 ,
2
2 1 0 ,
2 1 0 ,
1
x c x x c
x x c
K
b a
c

+ +
) )( 2 (
) (
2 0 , 2 1 0 ,
2 1 0 ,
2
x c x x c
x x c
K
d a
c

+ +
or
4
1
2
2 1
2 1
2 1 1
10 4
) 20 ( ) 2 50 (
5
) , (

+ +
x x x
x x
x x f
2
2 2 1
2 1
2 1 2
10 7 . 3
) 10 )( 2 50 (
) 5 (
) , (

+ +
x x x
x x
x x f
Graphs can be generated by specifying values of x1 and solving for x2 using a numerical
method like bisection.
first equation second equation
x1 x2 x1 x2
0 8.6672 0 4.4167
1 6.8618 1 3.9187
2 5.0649 2 3.4010
3 3.2769 3 2.8630
4 1.4984 4 2.3038
5 -0.2700 5 1.7227
These values can then be plotted to yield
-4
0
4
8
12
0 1 2 3 4 5
1st eq
2nd eq
Therefore, the root seems to be at about x1 = 3.3 and x2 = 2.7. Employing these values as the
initial guesses for the two-variable Newton-Raphson method gives
f1(3.3, 2.7) = 2.36 10
6

f2(3.3, 2.7) = 2.33 10
5

5
3
1
2 5
1
1
10 185 . 5 10 9 . 9

x
f
x
f
3
2
2 5
2
1
10 35 . 9 10 57 . 5

x
f
x
f
7
10 37 . 6

J
3367 . 3
10 37 . 6
) 10 57 . 5 ( 10 33 . 2 ) 10 35 . 9 ( 10 36 . 2
3 . 3
7
5 5 3 6
1

x
677 . 2
10 37 . 6
) 10 185 . 5 )( 10 36 . 2 ( ) 10 9 . 9 ( 10 33 . 2
7 . 2
7
3 6 5 5
2

x
The second iteration yields x1 = 3.3366 and x2 = 2.677, with a maximum approximate error of
0.003%.
8.7 Using the given values, a = 12.6126 and b = 0.0018707. Therefore, the roots problem to be
solved is
65000
223 ) 0018707 . 0 (
6126 . 12
) 0018707 . 0 (
) 223 ( 518 . 0
) (
+
v v
v
v f
A plot indicates a root at about 0.0028.
-1200000
-800000
-400000
0
400000
800000
0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004
Using initial guesses of 0.002 and 0.004, bisection can be employed to determine the root as
0.00275 after 12 iterations with a = 0.018%. The mass of methane contained in the tank can
be computed as 3/0.00275 = 1091 kg.
8.8 Using the given values, the roots problem to be solved is
0 5 . 8 5 4 ) 2 (
2
2
cos 4 ) (
2 1

1
]
1

,
_

h h h
h
h f
6
-20
0
20
40
60
0 1 2 3 4
A numerical method can be used to determine that the root is 0.77194.
0 75 . 0
3
) 3 (
) (
2

h h
h f

-2
0
2
4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
8.10 The best way to approach this problem is to use the graphical method displayed in Fig. 6.3.
For the first version, we plot
y1 = h and
3
7162 . 0
3
2
+
h
y
versus the range of h. Note that for the sphere, h ranges from 0 to 2r. As displayed below, this
version will always converge.
7
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
y
1
y
2
For the second version, we plot
y1 = h and
3 2
2
7162 . 0 3 h y
versus the range of h. As displayed below, this version is not convergent.
-1
0
1
2
3
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
y
1
y
2
8.11 Substituting the parameter values yields
75 . 1
1000
1
150
1
20
3
+
This can be rearranged and expressed as a roots problem

0
1
20 75 . 1 ) 1 ( 15 . 0 ) (
3
f
A plot of the function suggests a root at about 0.38.
8
-10
-5
0
5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
But suppose that we do not have a plot. How do we come up with a good initial guess? The
void fraction (the fraction of the volume that is not solid; i.e. consists of voids) varies
between 0 and 1. As can be seen, a value of 1 (which is physically unrealistic) causes a
division by zero. Therefore, two physically-based initial guesses can be chosen as 0 and 0.99.
Note that the zero is not physically realistic either, but since it does not cause any
mathematical difficulties, it is OK. Applying bisection yields a result of = 0.384211 in 15
iterations with an absolute approximate relative error of 7.87 10
3
%.
8.12 (a) The Reynolds number can be computed as
13743
10 79 . 1
005 . 0 ) 40 ( 23 . 1
Re
5

VD
In order to find f, we must determine the root of the function g(f)
0
1
13743
51 . 2
) 005 . 0 ( 7 . 3
0000015 . 0
log 0 . 2 ) (
,
_
+
f f
f g
As mentioned in the problem a good initial guess can be obtained from the Blasius formula
029185 . 0
13743
316 . 0
25 . 0
f
Using this guess, a root of 0.028968 can be obtained with an approach like the modified
secant method. This result can then be used to compute the pressure drop as
Pa 17 . 1140
) 005 . 0 ( 2
) 40 )( 23 . 1 ( 2 . 0
0.028968
2
p
(b) For the rougher steel pipe, we must determine the root of
0
1
13743
51 . 2
) 005 . 0 ( 7 . 3
000045 . 0
log 0 . 2 ) (
,
_
+
f f
f g
Using the same initial guess as in (a), a root of 0.04076 can be obtained. This result can then
be used to compute the pressure drop as
9
Pa 25 . 1604
) 005 . 0 ( 2
) 40 )( 23 . 1 ( 2 . 0
0.04076
2
p
Thus, as would be expected, the pressure drop is higher for the rougher pipe.
8.13 There are a variety of ways to solve this system of 5 equations
] [CO
] ][HCO [H
2
3
1
+
K (1)
] [HCO
] ][CO [H
3
2
3
2

+
K (2)
] ][OH [H =
+
w
K (3)
] [CO ] [HCO ] [CO =
2
3 3 2

+ +
T
c (4)
] [H ] [OH + ] [CO 2 ] [HCO = Alk
+ 2
3 3
+

(5)
One way is to combine the equations to produce a single polynomial. Equations 1 and 2 can
be solved for
1
3
2
] ][HCO [H
] [CO
K
+
] [H
] [HCO
] [CO
3 2 2
3
+
K
These results can be substituted into Eq. 4, which can be solved for
T
c F
0 2
] [CO
T
c F
1 3
] [HCO
T
c F
2
2
3
] [CO
where F
0
, F
1
, and F
2
are the fractions of the total inorganic carbon in carbon dioxide,
bicarbonate and carbonate, respectively, where

2 1 1
2
2
0
] [H ] [H
] [H
=
K K K
F
+ +
+ +
+

2 1 1
2
1
1
] [H ] [H
] [H
=
K K K
K
F
+ +
+ +
+

2 1 1
2
2 1
2
] [H ] [H
=
K K K
K K
F
+ +
+ +
Now these equations, along with the Eq. 3 can be substituted into Eq. 5 to give
Alk ] [H ] [H + 2 = 0
+ +
2 1
+
w T T
K c F c F
Although it might not be apparent, this result is a fourth-order polynomial in [H
+
].
( ) ( )
2 +
1 1 2 1
3 +
1
4 +
] H [ Alk ] H [ Alk ] H [
T w
c K K K K K K + + + +
( ) 0 ] H [ 2 Alk
2 1
+
2 1 1 2 1
+
w T w
K K K c K K K K K K
10
Substituting parameter values gives
0 10 512 . 2 ] H [ 10 055 . 1 ] H [ 10 012 . 5 ] H [ 10 001 . 2 ] H [
31 + 19 2 + 10 3 + 3 4 +
+

This equation can be solved for [H
+
] = 2.51 10
7
(pH = 6.6). This value can then be used to
compute
8
7
14
10 98 . 3
10 51 . 2
10
] [OH

( )
( ) ( )
( ) 001 . 0 10 3 33304 . 0 10 3
10 10 10 2.51 10 10 2.51
10 2.51
= ] CO [
3 3
3 . 10 3 . 6 7 - 3 . 6
2
7 -
2
7 -
2

+ +

( )
( ) ( )
( ) 002 . 0 10 3 666562 . 0 10 3
10 10 10 2.51 10 10 2.51
10 2.51 10
= ] HCO [
3 3
3 . 10 3 . 6 7 - 3 . 6
2
7 -
-7 3 . 6
3

+ +
( ) ( )
( ) M
7 3 3
3 . 10 3 . 6 7 - 3 . 6
2
7 -
3 . 10 3 . 6
2
3
10 4 10 3 000133 . 0 10 3
10 10 10 2.51 10 10 2.51
10 10
= ] CO [

+ +
8.14 The integral can be evaluated as
1
1
]
1
,
_
in out
in
out
max max max
ln
1 1 out
in
C C
C
C
K
k
dC
k C k
K
C
C
Therefore, the problem amounts to finding the root of
1
1
]
1
,
_
+
in out
in
out
max
out
ln
1
) ( C C
C
C
K
k F
V
C f
Excel solver can be used to find the root:

11
8.15 (a) The function to be solved is
5 . 3 ) 4 cos( 9 ) (
7 . 0

t e t f
t
A plot of the function indicates a root at about t = 0.25
-10
-5
0
5
10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
(b) The Newton-Raphson method can be set up as
i i
i
t
i i
t
i
t
i i
e t t e
t e
t t
7 . 0 7 . 0
7 . 0
1
) 4 cos( 3 . 6 ) 4 sin( 36
5 . 3 ) 4 cos( 9

Using an initial guess of 0.3,
i t f(t) f'(t) a
0 0.3 -0.85651 -29.0483
1 0.270514 -0.00335 -28.7496 10.899824%
2 0.270398 -1.2E-07 -28.7476 0.043136%
3 0.270398 0 -28.7476 0.000002%
(c) The secant method can be implemented with initial guesses of 0.3,
i ti1 f(ti1) ti
f(ti)
a
0 0.2 1.951189 0.4 -3.69862
1 0.4 -3.69862 0.269071
0.038125
48.66%
2 0.269071 0.038125 0.270407
-0.00026
0.49%
3 0.270407 -0.00026 0.270398
1.07E-07
0.0034%
12
A
P
A P
A P f
+
] 000 , 200 / ) / ( 25 cos[ / 4 . 0 1

250
) / (
A plot of the function indicates a root at about P/A = 163.
-100
0
100
200
0 50 100 150 200 250
15
12
6
600
cosh
12
) ( +
,
_
A
A
A
A
T
T
T
T f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about TA = 1700.
-50
0
50
100
150
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
8.18 This problem can be solved by determining the root of the derivative of the elastic curve
( )
4 2 2 4 0
6 5
120
0 L x L x
EIL
w
dx
dy
+
Therefore, after substituting the parameter values, we must determine the root of
13
0 10 296 . 1 000 , 160 , 2 5 ) (
11 2 4
+ x x x f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about x = 270.
-2E+11
-1E+11
0
1E+11
2E+11
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Bisection can be used to determine the root. Here are the first few iterations:
f(xl) f(xr
) a
1 0 500 250 -1.3E+11 -1.4E+10 1.83E+21
2 250 500 375 -1.4E+10 7.53E+10 -1.1E+21 33.33%
3 250 375 312.5 -1.4E+10 3.37E+10 -4.8E+20 20.00%
4 250 312.5 281.25 -1.4E+10 9.97E+09 -1.4E+20 11.11%
5 250 281.25 265.625 -1.4E+10 -2.1E+09 2.95E+19 5.88%
After 20 iterations, the root is determined as x = 268.328. This value can be substituted into
Eq. (P8.18) to compute the maximum deflection as
51519 . 0 )) 328 . 268 ( 10 296 . 1 ) 328 . 268 ( 000 , 720 ) 328 . 268 ( (
) 600 ( 000 , 30 ) 000 , 50 ( 120
5 . 2
11 3 5
+ y
8.19 (a) This problem can be solved by determining the root of
( ) 0 5 20 10 ) (
5 . 0 15 . 0

x x
e e x f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about x = 1 km.
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
0 2 4 6 8 10
Bisection can be used to determine the root. Here are the first few iterations:
f(xl) f(xr
) a
1 0 5 2.5 5 -3.01569 -15.0784
14
2 0 2.5 1.25 5 -0.87535 -4.37677 100.00%
3 0 1.25 0.625 5 1.422105 7.110527 100.00%
4 0.625 1.25 0.9375 1.422105 0.139379 0.198212 33.33%
5 0.9375 1.25 1.09375 0.139379 -0.39867 -0.05557 14.29%
After 10 iterations, the root is determined as x = 0.971679688 with an approximate error of
0.5%.
(b) The location of the minimum can be determined by differentiating the original function to
yield
0 5 . 0 15 . 0 ) ( '
5 . 0 15 . 0
+
x x
e e x f
The root of this function can be determined as x = 3.44 km. The value of the minimum
concentration can then be computed as
( ) 6433 . 1 20 10
) 44 . 3 ( 5 . 0 ) 44 . 3 ( 15 . 0

e e c
8.20 (a) This problem can be solved by determining the root of
0 15 20 75 ) (
075 . 0 5 . 1
+
t t
e e t f
A plot of the function indicates a root at about t = 4.
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 2 4 6 8 10
The Newton-Raphson method can be formulated as
i i
i i
t t
t t
i i
e e
e e
t t
075 . 0 5 . 1
075 . 0 5 . 1
1
5 . 1 5 . 112
15 20 75

+

+

Using the initial guess of t = 6, an accurate root determination can be obtained in a few
iterations:
i xi f(xi) f'(xi) a
0 6 -2.23818 -0.97033
1 3.693371 0.455519 -1.57879 62.45%
2 3.981896 0.02752 -1.39927 7.25%
3 4.001563 9.84E-05 -1.3893 0.49%
15
The result can be checked by substituting it back into the original equation to yield a
prediction close to 15:
0001 . 15 20 75
) 001563 . 4 ( 075 . 0 ) 001563 . 4 ( 5 . 1
+

e e c
8.21 The solution can be formulated as
x
e
x

+
,
_
,
_
16
48 ) 12 ( 2
cos
16
2
sin 5 . 0

or
5 . 0
8
sin ) ( +
,
_
x
e x x f

A plot of this function suggests a root at about 6.7:
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 5 10 15
500 , 5
1 ) 1 (
) 1 (
000 , 25 ) (
6
6
+
+
i
i i
i f
A plot of this function suggests a root at about 0.086:
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
16
8.23 (a) The solution can be formulated as
( )
t
t
e
e t f
08 . 0
045 . 0
29 1
000 , 300
000 , 100 000 , 75 2 . 1 ) (

+
+
A plot of this function suggests a root at about 40:
-200000
-100000
0
100000
200000
300000
0 20 40 60 80 100
(b) The false-position method can be implemented with the results summarized as
i tl tu f(tl) f(tu) tr f(tr) f(tl) f(tr) a
1 0 100.0000 200000 -176110 53.1760 -84245 -1.685E+10
2 0 53.1760 200000 -84245 37.4156 14442.8 2.889E+09 42.123%
3 37.4156 53.1760 14443 -84245 39.7221 -763.628 -1.103E+07 5.807%
4 37.4156 39.7221 14443 -763.628 39.6063 3.545288 5.120E+04 0.292%
5 39.6063 39.7221 4 -763.628 39.6068 0.000486 1.724E-03 0.001%
(c) The modified secant method (with = 0.01) can be implemented with the results
summarized as
i ti f(ti) ti ti+ti f(ti+ti) f (ti) a
0 50 -66444.8 0.50000 50.5 -69357.6 -5825.72
1 38.5946 6692.132 0.38595 38.98053 4143.604 -6603.33 29.552%
2 39.6080 -8.14342 0.39608 40.00411 -2632.32 -6625.36 2.559%
3 39.6068 -0.00345 0.39607 40.00287 -2624.09 -6625.35 0.003%
For both parts (b) and (c), the root is determined to be t = 39.6068. At this time, the ratio of
the suburban to the urban population is 135,142.5/112,618.7 = 1.2.
8.24 First, we can generate a plot of the function:
17
-100
-50
0
50
0 2 4 6 8 10
Thus, a zero value occurs at approximately x = 2.8.
A numerical solution can be developed in a number of ways. Using MATLAB, we would
first formulate an M-file for the shear function as:
function f = V(x)
f=20*(sing(x,0,1)-sing(x,5,1))-15*sing(x,8,0)-57;
In addition, the singularity function can be set up as
function s = sing(x, a, n)
if x > a
s = (x - a) ^ n;
else
s = 0;
end
We can then either design our own M-file or use MATLABs built-in capabilities like the
fzero function. A session using the fzero function would yield a root of 2.85 as shown
here,
>> x=fzero(@V,5)
x =
2.8500
8.25 First, we can generate a plot of the moment function:
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 2 4 6 8 10
18
first formulate an M-file for the moment function as:
function f = Mx(x)
f=-10*(sing(x,0,2)-sing(x,5,2))+15*sing(x,8,1)+150*sing(x,7,0)+57*x;
if x > a
s = (x - a) ^ n;
else
s = 0;
end
We can then either design our own M-file implementing one of the numerical methods in the
book or use MATLABs built-in capabilities like the fzero function. A session using the
fzero function would yield a root of 5.814 as shown here,
>> x=fzero(@Mx,5)
x =
5.8140
8.26 First, we can generate a plot of the slope function:
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
0 2 4 6 8 10
first formulate an M-file for the slope function as:
function f = duydx(x)
f=-10/3*(sing(x,0,3)-sing(x,5,3))+7.5*sing(x,8,2)+150*sing(x,7,1)+57/2*x^2-238.25;
if x > a
s = (x - a) ^ n;
else
s = 0;
end
19
We can then either design our own M-file implementing one of the numerical methods in the
book or use MATLABs built-in capabilities like the fzero function. A session using the
fzero function would yield a root of 3.9357 as shown here,
>> x=fzero(@duydx,5)
x =
3.9357
8.27 (a) First, we can generate a plot of the slope function:
-600
-400
-200
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Therefore, other than the end supports, there are no points of zero displacement.

(b) The location of the minimum can be determined by locating the zero of the slope function
as described in Prob. 8.26.
8.28 (a) The solution can be formulated as
01 . 0 ) 05 . 0 (
) 5 . 7 ( 2
280
5 . 7
1
cos ) (
2
)) 5 . 7 ( 2 /( ) 05 . 0 ( 280
1
1
]
1
,
_

C
e C f
or
01 . 0 ) 05 . 0 ( 4444 . 348
5 . 7
1
cos 393241 . 0 ) (
1
1
]
1

C
C f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about C = 1 10
4
.
20
-6.E-01
-3.E-01
0.E+00
3.E-01
0.E+00 1.E-04 2.E-04
(b) Bisection:
i Cl Cu Cr f(Cl) f(Cr)
f(Cl) f(C
r) a
1 5.0000E-05 1.5000E-04 1.0000E-04 -3.02E-01 -9.35E-03 0.002823
2 1.0000E-04 1.5000E-04 1.2500E-04 -9.35E-03 8.00E-02 -0.00075 20.00%
3 1.0000E-04 1.2500E-04 1.1250E-04 -9.35E-03 3.88E-02 -0.00036 11.11%
4 1.0000E-04 1.1250E-04 1.0625E-04 -9.35E-03 1.57E-02 -0.00015 5.88%
5 1.0000E-04 1.0625E-04 1.0313E-04 -9.35E-03 3.44E-03 -3.2E-05 3.03%
After 14 iterations, the root is determined as 0.000102277 with an approximate error of
0.006%.
(c) In order to use MATLAB, we can first set up a function to hold the equation to be solved,
function f = prob0828(C)
t = 0.05; R = 280; L = 7.5; goal = 0.01;
f=exp(-R*t/(2*L))*cos(sqrt(1/(L*C)-(R/(2*L))^2)*t)-goal;
Here is the session that then determines the root,
>> format long
>> fzero(@prob0828,1e-4)
ans =
1.022726852565315e-004
3 ) 2 cos( 9 ) (

t e t f
t
A plot of this function indicates roots at about t = 0.18, 0.9 and 1.05.
21
-10
-5
0
5
10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Using the Excel Solver and initial guesses of 0, 0.7 and 1 yields roots of t = 0.184363099,
0.903861928, and 1.049482051, respectively.
,
_
+ +

2 2
4
2
0 ) (
i
n N N q
N f
where
2769 . 73
300
1000
1350
42 . 2

,
_
Substituting this value along with the other parameters gives

6
20 2 17
10 5 . 6
10 54256 . 1 10 24571 . 1
2
0 ) (
,
_
+ +

N N
N f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about N = 9 10
9
.
-4.E+06
-2.E+06
0.E+00
2.E+06
4.E+06
6.E+06
0.0E+00 1.0E+10 2.0E+10
(b) The bisection method can be implemented with the results for the first 5 iterations
summarized as
i Nl Nu Nr f(Nl) f(Nr)
f(Nl) f(N
r) a
22
1 5.000E+09 1.500E+10 1.000E+10 2.23E+06 -3.12E+05 -7E+11
2 5.000E+09 1.000E+10 7.500E+09 2.23E+06 7.95E+05 1.77E+12 33.333%
3 7.500E+09 1.000E+10 8.750E+09 7.95E+05 2.06E+05 1.63E+11 14.286%
4 8.750E+09 1.000E+10 9.375E+09 2.06E+05 -6.15E+04 -1.3E+10 6.667%
5 8.750E+09 9.375E+09 9.063E+09 2.06E+05 6.99E+04 1.44E+10 3.448%
After 15 iterations, the root is 9.228 10
9
with a relative error of 0.003%.
(c) The modified secant method (with = 0.01) can be implemented with the results
summarized as
i Ni f(Ni) Ni Ni+Ni f(Ni+Ni) f (Ni) a
0 9.000E+09 9.672E+04 9.000E+07 9.09E+09 5.819E+04 -0.0004
1 9.226E+09 6.749E+02 9.226E+07 9.32E+09 -3.791E+04 -0.0004 2.449%
2 9.228E+09 -3.160E+00 9.228E+07 9.32E+09 -3.858E+04 -0.0004 0.017%
3 9.228E+09 1.506E-02 9.228E+07 9.32E+09 -3.858E+04 -0.0004 0.000%
2 / 3 2
) 81 . 0 (
59672 . 3 25 . 1 0 ) (
+

x
x
x f
A plot indicates roots at about 0.3 and 1.23.
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
A numerical method can be used to determine that the roots are 0.295372 and 1.229573.
2
7 5
2
10 6 10 97531 . 1 01333333 . 0 0 ) (
,
_
f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about = 150.
23
-0.5
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Note that the shape of the curve suggests that it may be ill-suited for solution with the false-
position method (refer to Fig. 5.14). This conclusion is borne out by the following results for
bisection and false position.
(b) The bisection method can be implemented with the results for the first 5 iterations
summarized as
i l u r f(l) f(r)
f(l) f(
r) a
1 1 1000 500.5 -1.98667 0.007553 -0.01501
2 1 500.5 250.75 -1.98667 0.004334 -0.00861 99.601%
3 1 250.75 125.875 -1.98667 -0.00309 0.006144 99.206%
4 125.875 250.75 188.3125 -0.00309 0.001924 -6E-06 33.156%
5 125.875 188.3125 157.0938 -0.00309 -6.2E-05 1.93E-07 19.873%
After 13 iterations, the root is 157.9474 with an approximate relative error of 0.077%.
(c) The false-position method can be implemented with the results for the first 5 iterations
summarized as
i l u f(l) f(u) r f(r) f(l) f(r) a
1 1 1000.0 -1.98667 0.008674 995.7 0.00867 -0.01722
2 1 995.7 -1.98667 0.00867 991.3 0.008667 -0.01722 0.436%
3 1 991.3 -1.98667 0.008667 987.0 0.008663 -0.01721 0.436%
4 1 987.0 -1.98667 0.008663 982.8 0.00866 -0.01720 0.436%
5 1 982.8 -1.98667 0.00866 978.5 0.008656 -0.01720 0.435%
After 578 iterations, the root is 189.4316 with an approximate error of 0.0998%. Note that the
true error is actually about 20%. Therefore, the false position method is a very poor choice
for this problem.
( )
f
f f f
1
4 . 0 Re log 4 ) (
10

We want our program to work for Reynolds numbers between 2,500 and 1,000,000.
Therefore, we must determine the friction factors corresponding to these limits. This can be
24
done with any root location method to yield 0.011525 and 0.002913. Therefore, we can set
our initial guesses as xl = 0.0028 and xu = 0.012. Equation (5.5) can be used to determine the
number of bisection iterations required to attain an absolute error less than 0.000005,
8454 . 10
000005 . 0
0028 . 0 012 . 0
log log
2
,
0
2

,
_
,
_
d a
E
x
n
which can be rounded up to 11 iterations. Here is a VBA function that is set up to implement
11 iterations of bisection to solve the problem. Note that because VBA does not have a built-
in function for the common logarithm, we have developed a user-defined function for this
purpose.
Function Bisect(xl, xu, Re)
Dim xrold As Double, test As Double
Dim xr As Double, iter As Integer, ea As Double
Dim i As Integer
iter = 0
For i = 1 To 11
xrold = xr
xr = (xl + xu) / 2
iter = iter + 1
If xr <> 0 Then
ea = Abs((xr - xrold) / xr) * 100
End If
test = f(xl, Re) * f(xr, Re)
If test < 0 Then
xu = xr
ElseIf test > 0 Then
xl = xr
Else
ea = 0
End If
Next i
Bisect = xr
End Function
Function f(x, Re)
f = 4 * log10(Re * Sqr(x)) - 0.4 - 1 / Sqr(x)
End Function
Function log10(x)
log10 = Log(x) / Log(10)
End Function
This can be implemented in Excel. Here are the results for a number of values within the
desired range. We have included the true value and the resulting error to verify that the results
are within the desired error criterion of Ea < 5 10
6
.
Re Root Truth Et
2500 0.011528320 0.011524764 3.56E-06
3000 0.010890430 0.010890229 2.01E-07
10000 0.007727930 0.007727127 8.02E-07
25
30000 0.005877148 0.005875048 2.10E-06
100000 0.004502539 0.004500376 2.16E-06
300000 0.003622070 0.003617895 4.18E-06
1000000 0.002912305 0.002912819 5.14E-07
mgh mgd d k
d k
d f +
2
1
2 / 5
2
2
1
5
2
0 ) (
Substituting the parameter values gives
305 . 397 9 . 882 000 , 25 16 0 ) (
2 2 / 5
+ d d d d f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about d = 0.145.
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
A numerical method can be used to determine that the root is d = 1.44933.
4 14 3 11 2 8 4
10 9520 . 1 10 5838 . 9 10 7215 . 9 10 671 . 1 10597 . 0 0 ) ( T T T T T f

+ + +
MATLAB can be used to determine all the roots of this polynomial,
>> format long
>> x=[1.952e-14 -9.5838e-11 9.7215e-8 1.671e-4 -0.10597];
>> roots(x)
ans =
1.0e+003 *
2.74833708474921 + 1.12628559147229i
2.74833708474921 - 1.12628559147229i
-1.13102810059654
0.54408753765551
The only realistic value is 544.0875. This value can be checked using the polyval function,
26
>> polyval(x,544.08753765551)
ans =
3.191891195797325e-016
y y x
v
g
x f +
0
2
0
2 2
0
0 0
cos 2
) (tan ) (

( )
( )
1
180 / cos
0215625 . 15
180 / tan 35 0 ) (
0
2
0 0
+
f
where 0 is expressed in degrees. A plot of this function indicates roots at about 0 = 27
o
and
61
o
.
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
The Excel solver can then be used to determine the roots to higher accuracy. Using an initial
guesses of 27
o
and 61
o
yields 0 = 27.2036
o
and 61.1598
o
, respectively. Therefore, two angles
result in the desired outcome. Note that the lower angle would probably be preferred as the
ball would arrive at the catcher faster.
v gt
qt m
m
u t f
0
0
ln ) (
750 81 . 9
700 , 2 000 , 150
000 , 150
ln 000 , 2 ) (
t
t
t f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about t = 21.
27
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Because two initial guesses are given, a bracketing method like bisection can be used to
determine the root,
i tl tu tr f(tl) f(tr) f(tl) f(tr) a
1 10 50 30 -451.198 508.7576 -229550
2 10 30 20 -451.198 -53.6258 24195.86 50.00%
3 20 30 25 -53.6258 200.424 -10747.9 20.00%
4 20 25 22.5 -53.6258 67.66275 -3628.47 11.11%
5 20 22.5 21.25 -53.6258 5.689921 -305.127 5.88%
6 20 21.25 20.625 -53.6258 -24.2881 1302.471 3.03%
7 20.625 21.25 20.9375 -24.2881 -9.3806 227.8372 1.49%
8 20.9375 21.25 21.09375 -9.3806 -1.8659 17.50322 0.74%
Thus, after 8 iterations, the approximate error falls below 1% with a result of t = 21.09375.
Note that if the computation is continued, the root can be determined as 21.13242.
2
) 119887 . 34 / ( 1
007158 . 0
) 1 3 / tan( ) (
f
A plot of this function indicates a root at about = 3.1.
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
0 1 2 3 4
A numerical method can be used to determine that the root is = 3.06637.
8.39 Excel Solver solution:
28
8.40 The problem reduces to finding the value of n that drives the second part of the equation to
1. In other words, finding the root of
( ) 0 1 1
1
) (
/ ) 1 (

n n
c
R
n
n
n f
Inspection of the equation indicates that singularities occur at x = 0 and 1. A plot indicates
that otherwise, the function is smooth.
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
0 0.5 1 1.5
A tool such as the Excel Solver can be used to locate the root at n = 0.8518.
29
8.41 The following application of Excel Solver can be set up:
The solution is:
8.42 This problem was solved using the roots command in MATLAB.
c =
1 -33 -704 -1859
roots(c)
ans =
48.3543
-12.2041
-3.1502
Therefore,
1 = 48.4 Mpa 2 = 3.15 MPa 3 = 12.20 MPa
30
8.43 For this problem, two continuity conditions must hold. First, the flows must balance,
3 2 1
Q Q Q + (1)
Second, the energy balance must hold. That is, the head losses in pipes 1 and 3 must balance
the elevation drop between reservoirs A and C,
C A L L
E E H H +
3 , 1 ,
(2)
The head losses for each pipe can be computed with
g
V
D
L
f H
i
i
i
i i L
2
2
,
(3)
The flows and velocities are related by the continuity equation, which for a circular pipe is
2
4
i
i
i
D
Q
V
(4)
Finally, the Colebrook equation relates the friction factor to the pipe characteristics as in
,
_
+
i i
i
i
i
f
D
f Re
51 . 2
7 . 3
log 0 . 2
1
where = the roughness (m), and Re = the Reynolds number,
i
i i
i
D V
Re

where = kinematic viscosity (m
2
/s).
These equations can be combined to reduce the problem to two equations with 2 unknowns.
First, Eq. 4 can be solved for Q and substituted into Eq. 1 to give
0
4 4
3
2
3
2 1
2
1
V
D
Q V
D
(5)
Then, Eq. 3 can be substituted into Eq. 2 to yield
0 ) (
2 2
2
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
+
C A
E E V
gD
L
f V
gD
L
f
(6)
Therefore, if we knew the friction factors, these are two equations with two unknowns, V1 and
V3. If we could solve for these velocities, we could then determine the flows in pipes 1 and 3
31
via Eq. 4. Further, we could then determine the head losses in each pipe and compute the
elevation of reservoir B as
2 , 1 , L L A B
H H E E
(7)
There are a variety of ways to obtain the solution. One nice way is to use the Excel Solver.
First the calculation can be set up as

The shaded cells are input data and the bold cells are the unknowns. The remaining cells are
computed with formulas as outlined below. Note that we have named the cells so that the
formulas are easier to understand.
32
Notice that we have set up the flow and head loss balances (Eqs. 5 and 6) in cells b23 and
b24. We form a target cell (c26) as the summation of the squares of the balances (c23 and
c24). It is this target cell that must be minimized to solve the problem.
An important feature of the solution is that we use a VBA worksheet function, ff, to solve for
the friction factors in cells b16, d16 and f16. This function uses the modified secant method
to solve the Colebrook equation for the friction factor. As shown below, it uses the Blasius
formula to obtain a good initial guess:
Option Explicit
Function ff(e, D, Re)
Dim imax As Integer, iter As Integer
Dim es As Double, ea As Double
Dim xr As Double, xrold As Double, fr As Double
Const del As Double = 0.01
es = 0.01
imax = 20
'Blasius equation
xr = 0.316 / Re ^ 0.25
iter = 0
Do
xrold = xr
fr = f(xr, e, D, Re)
xr = xr - fr * del * xr / (f(xr + del * xr, e, D, Re) - fr)
iter = iter + 1
If (xr <> 0) Then
End If
If ea < es Or iter >= imax Then Exit Do
Loop
ff = xr
End Function
Function f(x, e, D, Re)
'Colebrook equation
f = -2 * Log(e / (3.7 * D) + 2.51 / Re / Sqr(x)) / Log(10) - 1 / Sqr(x)
End Function
The Excel Solver can then be used to drive the target cell to a minimum by varying the cells
for V1 (cell b12) and V3 (cell f12).
33
The results of Solver are shown below:
Therefore, the solution is V1 = 1.12344 and V3 = 1.309158. Equation 4 can then be used to
compute Q1 = 0.14118 and Q3 = 0.041128. Finally, Eq. 7 can be used to compute the
elevation of reservoir B as 179.564.
8.44 This problem can be solved in a number of ways. The following solution employs Excel and
its Solver option. A worksheet is developed to solve for the pressure drop in each pipe and
then determine the flow and pressure balances. Here is how the worksheet is set up,
34
The following shows the data and formulas that are entered into each cell.
Notice that we have set up the flow and pressure head loss balances in cells b16 through b21.
We form a target cell (c23) as the summation of the squares of the residuals (c16 through
c21). It is this target cell that must be minimized to solve the problem. The following shows
how this was done with the Solver.
35
Here is the final result:
8.45 This problem can be solved in a number of ways. The following solution employs Excel and
its Solver option. A worksheet is developed to solve for the pressure drop in each pipe and
then determine the flow and pressure drop balances. Here is how the worksheet is set up,
36
The following shows the data and formulas that are entered into each cell.
Notice that we have set up the flow and pressure head loss balances in cells b16 through b21.
We form a target cell (c23) as the summation of the squares of the residuals (c16 through
c21). It is this target cell that must be minimized to solve the problem.
An important feature of the solution is that we use a VBA worksheet function, ff, to solve for
the friction factors in column h. This function uses the modified false position method to
solve the von Karman equation for the friction factor.
Option Explicit
Function ff(Re)
Dim iter As Integer, imax As Integer
Dim il As Integer, iu As Integer
Dim xrold As Double, fl As Double, fu As Double, fr As Double
Dim xl As Double, xu As Double, es As Double
37
Dim xr As Double, ea As Double
xl = 0.00001
xu = 1
es = 0.01
imax = 40
iter = 0
fl = f(xl, Re)
fu = f(xu, Re)
Do
xrold = xr
xr = xu - fu * (xl - xu) / (fl - fu)
fr = f(xr, Re)
iter = iter + 1
If xr <> 0 Then
End If
If fl * fr < 0 Then
xu = xr
fu = f(xu, Re)
iu = 0
il = il + 1
If il >= 2 Then fl = fl / 2
ElseIf fl * fr > 0 Then
xl = xr
fl = f(xl, Re)
il = 0
iu = iu + 1
If iu >= 2 Then fu = fu / 2
Else
ea = 0
End If
If ea < es Or iter >= imax Then Exit Do
Loop
ff = xr
End Function
Function f(x, Re)
f = 4 * Log(Re * Sqr(x)) / Log(10) - 0.4 - 1 / Sqr(x)
End Function
The Excel Solver can then be used to drive the target cell to a minimum by varying the flows
in cells e6 through e11.
Here is the final result:
38
8.46 The horizontal and vertical components of the orbiter thruster can be computed as
sin
S H
T F cos
S V
T F
A moment balance about point G can be computed as
sin 38 cos 24 24 4 4
S S S B B
T T W T W M +
Substituting the parameter values yields
sin 10 75 . 42 cos 10 27 10 068 . 20
6 6 6
+ M
This function can be plotted for the range of 5 to +5 radians
-8.E+07
-4.E+07
0.E+00
4.E+07
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
A valid root occurs at about 0.15 radians.
A MATLAB M-file called prob0846.m can be written to implement the Newton-Raphson
method to solve for the root as
% Shuttle Liftoff Engine Angle
% Newton-Raphson Method of iteratively finding a single root
39
format long
% Constants
LGB = 4.0; LGS = 24.0; LTS = 38.0;
WS = 0.230E6; WB = 1.663E6;
TB = 5.3E6; TS = 1.125E6;
es = 0.5E-7; nmax = 200;
% Initial estimate in radians
x = 0.25
%Calculation loop
for i=1:nmax
fx = LGB*WB-LGB*TB-LGS*WS+LGS*TS*cos(x)-LTS*TS*sin(x);
dfx = -LGS*TS*sin(x)-LTS*TS*cos(x);
xn=x-fx/dfx;
%convergence check
ea=abs((xn-x)/xn);
if (ea<=es)
fprintf('convergence: Root = %f radians \n',xn)
theta = (180/pi)*x;
fprintf('Engine Angle = %f degrees \n',theta)
break
end
x=xn;
x
end
The program can be run with the result:
>> prob0846
x =
0.15000000000000
x =
0.15519036852630
x =
0.15518449747863
convergence: Root = 0.155184 radians
Engine Angle = 8.891417 degrees
The program can be run for the case of the minimum payload, by changing Ws to 195,000 and
running the M-file with the result:
>> prob0846
x =
0.15000000000000
x =
0.17333103912866
x =
0.17321494968603
convergence: Root = 0.173215 radians
Engine Angle = 9.924486 degrees

Numerical Method For Engineers-Chapter 8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Numerical Method For Engineers-Chapter 8

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Numerical Method For Engineers-Chapter 8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

This can be rearranged and expressed as a roots problem

] 000 , 200 / ) / ( 25 cos[ / 4 . 0 1

Substituting this value along with the other parameters gives

You might also like