Best ODE algorithm to use for time/velocity independent potentials?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on selecting an appropriate ordinary differential equation (ODE) algorithm for simulating the motion of a large number of interacting points (150 to 300) influenced by distance-dependent potentials, similar to gravitational interactions. The user is exploring options for accurate and stable numerical methods, expressing a preference for algorithms that minimize error propagation. Recommendations include the Runge-Kutta method, particularly the fourth-order version (RK4), which is noted for its accuracy and convergence properties. The user also inquires about the comparative effectiveness of RK4 versus Beeman and velocity-Verlet methods, particularly regarding trajectory accuracy and energy conservation. The consensus suggests that while Beeman is effective for energy conservation, RK4 may offer improved accuracy in trajectory calculations.
Signifier
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but I don't readily see a "numerical methods" forum here so I assumed this would be the place to go. Sorry if I overlooked another place to post this!

Anyway, I have some points interacting via potentials that are dependent only on distances (IE, not time or velocity), and I am wondering what would be the best ODE algorithm to use to simulate the motions of these points. The number of interacting points is fairly large, from 150 to 300. Let's say they're interacting via an additive pairwise potential similar to Newton's law of gravitation.

What would be a decent ODE algorithm to use that is both fairly accurate (and not subject to huge error propagation) and not too complicated for solving the equations of motion?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Technology news on Phys.org
Runge-Kutta is a standard ODE algorithm for problems like yours. Try a fourth order for reasonably decent convergence.
 
Is RK4 noticeably better than, for example, Beeman or velocity-Verlet? I've never used RK4, though I know it's the word for many people. I don't know much about it. Right now, I'm using Beeman for energy conservation, though what I'm most interested in is accuracy of trajectories. Would RK give me a bump up in this category?

Thank you in advance!
 
Dear Peeps I have posted a few questions about programing on this sectio of the PF forum. I want to ask you veterans how you folks learn program in assembly and about computer architecture for the x86 family. In addition to finish learning C, I am also reading the book From bits to Gates to C and Beyond. In the book, it uses the mini LC3 assembly language. I also have books on assembly programming and computer architecture. The few famous ones i have are Computer Organization and...
I have a quick questions. I am going through a book on C programming on my own. Afterwards, I plan to go through something call data structures and algorithms on my own also in C. I also need to learn C++, Matlab and for personal interest Haskell. For the two topic of data structures and algorithms, I understand there are standard ones across all programming languages. After learning it through C, what would be the biggest issue when trying to implement the same data...
Back
Top