[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
## Re: DAE daspk solver problem

**From**: |
SunilShah |

**Subject**: |
Re: DAE daspk solver problem |

**Date**: |
Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:17:52 -0700 (PDT) |

As I understand it, Radau5.f demands a structure of DAEs with Linearly
implicit form:
M Y' = F(Y,T)
DASPK admits allows a more general form F(Y,Y',T)=0. There can be problems
that can not be transformed to the linearly implicit form.
For large scale problems, (> 1e5 variables), retaining sparsity is an
important issue, so DASPK structure can offer some advantages. Even when
the equations can be symbolically transformed, symbolic manipulation may not
scale well (perhaps the problem with scaling in Modelica), or may destroy
sparsity and therefore have inefficient discrete propagation.
Lastly, the fortran DASPK / DASKR can take advantage of implicit sparse
solvers. Do octave implementations allow this?
--
View this message in context:
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/DAE-daspk-solver-problem-tp4680377p4680409.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

**DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/26`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Sebastian Schöps*, `2016/10/27`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/27`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Sebastian Schöps*, `2016/10/28`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Bill Greene*, `2016/10/28`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Sebastian Schöps*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Sebastian Schöps*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**,
*SunilShah* **<=**
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Bill Greene*, `2016/10/28`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *SunilShah*, `2016/10/28`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *c.*, `2016/10/29`
**Re: DAE daspk solver problem**, *Lazy_Tom*, `2016/10/29`