Discussion and conclusion

To sum up the whole applications without any exaggerations, the Bisection and the Newton-Raphson method are applied on the same
application which are used to solve the non-linear equations. The aim
of these several techniques is to approximate the error within each
method by using the respective techniques of both methods, as both
methods are applied on the same application which make the
comparison more reliable, comparing the error approximated from the
bi-section method with the Newton-Raphson method with the reason
outcome these calculations. Briefly, the application example
demonstrating a spherical storage tank with dimension of 8 ft diameter
and a dipstick of 10 ft long going through the sphere from the top and
immersing to the oil at 6 ft3, where the height h is needed which is the
height of the dipstick immersed in the oil. The given equation for this
application is f(h) = h3- 9h2+3.8197=0. On applying the Bi-section
method, the approximated error calculated is 0.14% after 10
irritations, while the Newton-Raphson method obtained approximated
error is 0.000738% after 5 irritations. Before discussing theoretically
both methods and there scientific advantages and drawback, it's
obvious from the results that the Newton-Raphson method is more
effective than the Bi-section method. As the percentage of error
obtained by the Newton-Raphson is more precise than the Bi-section
method 0.000738%<0.14%, besides the number of irritations held in
the Newton-Raphson less than Bi-section method. In means of
numerical analysis, the Newton-Raphson method is simply a method
for obtaining a successively better (precise) calculation to the zeroes
which is commonly known as roots of the real-value for the function.
Comparing the differences between both methods is that the NewtonRaphson method is a more efficient technique than the Bi-section
method which is considered a simple method. Although the discussed
theory, it doesn't neglect the fact that both methods have their own
drawbacks. As for the Bi-section method's drawbacks, Firstly this
method converges between points very slowly as it aims to use the
halving technique on the interval. Moreover, the bisection method
requires two guessing points while the Newton-Raphson needs only one
guessing point, also when one of both guessing interval is close to the
real root, it will needs more number of irritation to achieve the root.
Additionally, the function f(x) in the case that it touches the x-axis,
finding the lower guessing point will be impossible and the upper guess
such that f(xa)f(xb)<0. As for the Newton-Raphson Method, apart from

its advantages that overcomes the bisection method; that its

converges more faster than the other method and requires only one
guessing point that leads to simplify obtaining the initial point. Even
though in other cases, Newton-Raphson method has its own
drawbacks. Firstly, the division by zero. As discussed before, the
formula of the Newton-Raphson contains the division of the function
over its own derivative, In the case of an iteration value,
xi is
such that f '(xi), so division by zero can occur. that will result a large
difference magnitude for the afterward value, x i+1, even how far the
irritation number is increased, the method will still not converges.
Moreover, the root jumping,
in other cases as the function f(x) is an oscillating function and has a
various number of roots, the initial guess selected could be close to the
root. However, the points guessed may jump and converge to some
other root. Comparing the two methods by each other at the case of
solving them analytically doesn't give us the ultimate precise
approximated error. A more advanced software as the MATLAB is
needed to obtain the approximated error we need to obtain. For this
comparison each method will be compared to itself by analytical
method and MATLAB software. For the Newton-Raphson method, as
stated before the approximated error obtained after 5 irritations is
0.000738 while the error calculated by the MATLAB is 1.7325e -005 after
4 irritations only, which makes it obvious that using the MATLAB to
solve this type of method is far more accurate than the analytical
solving, as it neglects the human error which is possible and also
obtains the error faster than the analytical method. The third method
use to approximate the error is the Lagrange interpolation method. As
discussed before, the Lagrange's main equations includes adding each
degree multiplied by its own corresponding (x), each degree depends
on the previous one but the error at each phase is different. As for the
application applied on the Lagrange method, it is asked to obtain the
heat required to reached the water to its boiling point by calculating
the specific heat at 70 C0, and a tabulated table with the temperatures
and specific heat if given. As the Lagrange method aim to obtain an
unknown point of x which is corresponding y is given (70 C 0), there are
points are taken from the table to fulfill each equation (degree) at L 0(x),
L1(x), L2(x).........Ln. Each degree of Ln will result an approximated error
different from each other, that does not neglect the fact that each
degree is related/depending on the previous one. As for degree one
L0(x)= 4193.8, L1(x)= 4195.24, L2(x)= 4193.3. Moreover the errors
between degree one and two =0.0004626% which is less than the
error between degree 3 and degree 2 of error= 0.0003432. Which is
deduced that the percentage of error is decreasing and that the

Lagrange method is working efficiently to obtain the approximated

error. Although the Lagrange method is straight forward and accurate,
it has couple of drawback that has to be discussed. Firstly, the
calculations needed to reach the final answers are too long, and the
equations could be confused between them. Also if any points are
added to the calculations, the whole method should be calculated from
the beginning as each degree depends on the other. Finally, the
Lagrange Interpolation method which is calculated analytically will be
compared to the MATLAB software results. The MATLAB software
obtained the 3 values of the 3 degrees, for degree one the error =
4.1771e+03, for degree 2 the error= 4.1969e03 and for the third degree
the error = 4.1932e+03. It is deduced from the results obtained from the
MATLAB comparing it to the analytical calculations, it appears that
using the MATLAB is more accurate in approximating the error, also its
much more faster than the analytical method.