MAE 185. Numerical Methods for Mechanical Engineers.

Spring 2003.
UCI.
Student Name: Nasser Abbasi
Assignment #1.

Problems

5.3 Determine the real roots of

f(x)=-26+82.3x –88x^2 +45.4 x^3 –9x^4 +0.65 x^5
(b) Using bisection to determine the highest root to
E_s=10%. Employ and initial guesses of X_l=0.5 and
X_u=1.0
(c) Perform the same computation as in (b) but use the
false-position method and E_s=0.1%

6.9 Determine the lowest positive root of f(x)=7 sin(x)

exp(-x) –1
(b) Using the Newton-Raphson method (three iterations,
x_i=0.3)
(c) Using the secant method (three iterations, x_i-
1=0.5 and x_i = 0.4)

6.11 Determine the roots of the following simulataneous

nonlinear equations using (a) fixed-point iteration and
(b) the Newton-Raphson method:
x = y+x^2 – 0.5
y = x^2 – 5xy
Employee initial guesses of x=y=1.0 and discuss the
results.

7.5 Use Bairstow’s method to determine the roots of

(c)f(x)=x^4 - 2x^3 + 6x^3 - 2x +5

Solutions

5.3 part (b)

Using bisection method.
Before starting, plot the function to get an idea of
where the root is located.

>> ezplot('-26+82.3*x - 88*x^2 +45.4* x^3 -9*x^4

+0.65*x^5')

This table below shows the progress of the iterations.

In this table, x1 is the ‘lower’ point, and x2 is the

‘upper’ point.
x_m is the middle point. It is found from (x2-x1)/2.

Start with x1=0.5 and x2=1.0 as given in the problem.

At each iteration the size of the region containing the

root decreases by a factor of 2. Assume the size of the
original region containing the root is A, and assume
that the desired size of the ending tolerance is B,
hence the number of iterations is log2(A/B). In this
problem A=0.5 and B=(10% A). This is below a graphical
representation of bisection.
‘x’ below represents where the root being bracketed is.
 ----------A=0.5 ------
|-------------x----------| 100%
|-----x----------| 50%
|-----x--| 25%
|-x--| 12.5%
|-x| 6.25%
<-->
B

Hence the number of iterations needed to reach a region

10% of the original region is log2(0.5/(0.10*0.5))=
log2(1/0.1)=log2(10)= 3.322 or 4 iterations.

E_s is the ratio of the size of the new bracketing

region to the original size of the bracketing region as
a percentage.

It x1 x_m x2 f(x1) f(x_m) f(x2) Max Es

er Err %
1 0.5 0.75 1.0 - 2.6847 5.35 0.5 50
1.7171 17
875
2 0.5 0.625 0.7 - 0.8351 2.6847 0.25 25
5 1.7171 822 17
875
3 0.5 0.562 0.6 - - 0.8351 0.12 12
5 25 1.7171 0.3341 822 5 .5
875 88
4 0.56 0.593 0.6 - 0.2747 0.8351 0.06 6.
25 75 25 0.3341 303 82 25 25
88

So we take x=0.59375 as the approximation to the root.

Solution to 5.3 (c)

Here, use the requla falsi formula of
x2 = x1 – f(x1)*(x0-x1)/( f(x0) – f(x1) )
(see page 44 of the main text book for how the above
formula was derived)

f(x)=-26+82.3x –88x^2 +45.4 x^3 –9x^4 +0.65 x^5

start with x0=0.5, x1=1.0

Using the algorithm shown on table 47 of the text book:

REPEAT
Set x2= x1 – f(x1)*(x0-x1)/( f(x0) – f(x1) )
IF f(x2) of opposite sign to f(x0)
Set x1=x2
ELSE
Set x0=x2
END IF
UNTIL | f(x2) | < tolerance

In this problem we are asked to stop when E_s=0.1%,

where
The difference between this method and the bisection
method is that the size of the new bracketing region is
not neccessarly half the size of the bracketing region
of the previous step. Hence we do not know in advance
the number of steps needed to achieve the required
tolerance.
To know when to stop use this: when the delta change of
the size of the bracketed region is 0.1% of the size of
the bracketed region of the previous step, then we
stop. So, let s(i) be the size of the bracketed
Region at step i, then E_S = s(i-1)-s(i)/(s(i-1) * 100
%

x0 x1 F(x0) f(x1) X2 Size E_s

of
region
1 0. 1.0 - 0.7745 0.6214 1.0-
5 1.7171 010 90 0.5
875 =0.5
2 0. 0.621 - 0.0849 0.5837 0.6214 0.5-
5 49 1.7171 378 27 90-0.5 0.12149/0.5
875 =0.121 = 75.7%
49
3 0. 0.583 - 0.0088 0.5797 0.5837 0.12149-
5 727 1.7171 116 81 27-0.5 0.083727/0.
875 =0.083 12149
727 =31.08%
4 0. 0.579 - 0.0009 0.5793 0.5797 0.083727-
5 781 1.7171 087 73 81-0.5 0.079781/0.
875 =0.079 083727
781 =4.71%
5 0. 0.579 - 0.0009 0.5793 - 0.079781-
5 373 1.7171 010 31 .57937 0.079373/0.
875 3-0.5 079781
=0.079 =0.51%
373
6 0. 0.579 - 9.2853 0.5793 0.5793 0.079373-
5 331 1.7171 77E- 2671 31-0.5 0.079331/0.
875 005 =0.079 079373
331 =0.05%

So root is taken as 0.57932671

To verify, I used matlab symbolic solve function to

find the real root:

>> solve('-26+82.3*x - 88*x^2 +45.4* x^3 -9*x^4

+0.65*x^5')

ans =

[ .579326592861950261
846454370632]
[ 1.07726983544428433169938136893-
.860621514282949848638960605085*i]
[
1.07726983544428433169938136893+.8606215142829498486389
60605085*i]
[ 5.55614379120166361430046836883-
2.33378449456931739881421919764*i]
[
5.55614379120166361430046836883+2.333784494569317398814
21919764*i]

This shows there is one real root which is

.579326592861950261846454370632.

So the false position method converged to the actual

root faster than the bisection method did after the
same number of iterations. This is the expected result
for functions that are smooth near the root.

Solution to 6.9 (b)

Using Newton-Raphson method.

Before starting, plot the function to get an idea of

where the roots are

This is a plot of f(x)=7 sin(x) exp(-x) –1

The iteration formula is

x_(n+1) = x_n – f(x_n)/f’(x_n)

where f(x) = 7 sin(x) exp(-x) –1

so, f’(x) = 7 cos(x) exp(-x) – 7 sin(x) exp(-x)

This table shows the 3 iterations. We start with x=0.3

(I assumed the first step is not part of the iteration
process)

n x_n f(x_n) f’(x_n) x_(n+1)

0 0.3 0.5324873 3.4216275 0.144376
1 0.144376 - 5.1241684 0.1694085
0.1282708
2 0.1694085 - 4.8282779 0.1701793
0.0037214
3 0.1701793 - 4.8193032 0.170179994
0.0000035

So, after 3 iteration, we take x=0.170179994 as

approximation to the root

To verify, used matlab to solve it

>> solve('7*sin(x)*exp(-x)-1')
ans =

.170179993753835176860864670115239502017737590738214599
312052

Solution for 6.9 (c)

Using the secant method. Start with x1=0.4, x0=0.5

F(x1)= 0.8272
F(x0)= 1.0355
Since |f(x0)| > |f(x1)| then no need to swap x0 with
x1.
(i.e. need to keep x1 closer to the root)

Using the iteration formula given in the book on page

44

x2= x1 – f(x1)*(x0-x1)/( f(x0) – f(x1) )

x0= x1
x1= x2

The result of the calculation is shown in this table

N X0 X1 F(x0) F(x1) X2
0 0.5 0.4 1.0355040 0.827244 0.002782
1 0.4 0.002782 0.8272444 - 0.218237
0.9805797
2 0.002782 0.218237 0.2184109 - 0.178990
0.9805801
3 0.218237 0.178989 0.2184127 0.0420032 0.169644

So, after 3 iterations, root is taken as 0.169644

This shows that Newton-Raphson method converged faster
than the secant method to the root for this function.
Solution for 6.11 (a)

First I plot the 2 function to get an idea where the

solutions are. The solution is where the 2 functions
intersect.

ezplot('x^2-y-5*x*y');
hold on;
ezplot('y+x^2-x-0.5')
h=findobj(gca,'type','line');
set(h(1),'LineStyle','--')

So, I see that there are 3 solutions.

Zoom in:
let me also find the exact solutions using matlab to
make sure my worked out answers are correct:

>> SOL=solve('x^2-y-5*x*y','y+x^2-x-0.5')

SOL =

x: [3x1 sym]
y: [3x1 sym]

>> SOL.x

ans =

[ -.45518959344844446505992693519646]
[ -.17812819955522914530391522665854]
[ 1.2333177930036736103638421618550]

>> SOL.y

ans =

[ -.16238715943220462132849109792298]
[ .29014214496798331801721391559981]
[ .21224501446422130331127718232317]
Now, using fixed point iteration to solve

x = y + x^2 – 0.5 ------ (1)

y = x^2 – 5xy ------ (2)

let x=g(x,y), y=f(x,y). Start iteration with x=1, y=1.

With g(x,y)=y+x^2 – 0.5, and f(x,y)=x^2 –5xy we get

this table

X y x=G(x,y) Y=F(x,y)
1 1 1.5 -4
1.5 -4 -2.25 32.25
-2.25 32.25 36.8125 367.875

So, x and y values are diverging. Forms selected for

g(x) and f(y) are not working. I Need to select
different form.

Rewrite (1) as y=x-x^2+0.5 ---- (1)

Rewrite (2) as x=(x^2-y)/5y ---- (2)

Now, y=G(x,y) = x - x^2 + 0.5

X=f(x,y) = (x^2-y) / 5y

Start with x=y=1, I get this table

X y y=G(x,y) X=F(y,x)
1 1 0.5 0
0 0.5 0.5 -0.2
-.2 .5 .34 -.216
-.216 .34 .330656 -.1533
-.1533 .330656 .3702 -.1765
-.1765 .3702 .29235 -.1688
-.1688 .29235 .30271 -.17151
-.17151 .30271 .299 -.1705

This form seems to converge to around y=.29 and x=-0.17

So one solution is y=0.29 and x=-0.17
This agrees with matlab. This finds one solution.