• Join over 1.2 million students every month
• Accelerate your learning by 29%
• Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

# numerical solutions-Comparison of the three methods and Newton Raphson

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Numerical Solutions of equations

1. Newton Raphson method

Equation to be solved is x³−5x−1=0  The function f(x)= x³−5x−1is shown below There are 3 roots. I will first find the root in the interval [2, 3]

I will do the first few lines of calculation manually.

The formula to use is:  xn+1= xn –f(xn)/ f’(xn)

Therefore I must first differentiate x³−5x−1 which is 3x2-5

Using x1=3

X2:   3 – [(33-5 x 3-1)/(3 x 32 -5)] = 2.5

X3:   2.5 – [(2.53-5 x 2.5-1)/(3 x 2.52 -5)] = 2.3455

I will now work out all 3 roots using autograph until 5 significant figures are guaranteed   The 3 boxes above show how I obtained the 3 roots of the equation x³−5x−1=0

Which are -0.20164, -2.1284 and 2.3301

Below is the function f(x)= x³−5x−1 showing where I applied the

Middle  Error bounds for interval [2, 3]

2.3301 is the root in this interval to 5 significant figures.

Therefore the error is 2.3301 ± 0.00005 I will now perform the change of sign test to confirm it is within these limits.

Lower limit is 2.33005 then f (2.33005) = -0.000098648

Upper limit is 2.33015 then f (2.33015) = 0.0010302

There is a change of sign which confirms root in interval is 2.3301 ± 0.00005

When does this method fail?

The Newton Raphson method does not always work, I will show this Using the equation (5x+4)1/7 =0

This function is shown below with autographs attempt to find the root using tangents to the curve starting at x= -1

The function f(x) = (5x+4)1/7 As you can see from the graph and the Values of x in the table, it was unable to find the root in the interval [-1, 0]. This is because of the gradient of the curve, where my starting value is very close to a turning point. Then rather than converging towards the root, it is diverging further and further away on the x axis, therefore overflows and is unable to find the root.

Comparison of methods

Conclusion

Comparing Ease of use of Hardware and software

It’s very obvious that the hardware and software speeds up the process of working out the solutions dramatically, as manually is very time consuming and easier to make mistakes.

Autograph is very easy to use and therefore Newton Raphson and rearrangement methods are very easy to perform, as you simply have to add the equation and perform the functions required which only require very few steps and choosing the starting point.  However change of sign requires more knowledge of Excel, having to input the formula yourself and choosing appropriate values for x to converge to the root. However once you know how to use excel you are able to drag down and it copies the formula for each value of x without having to retype it. For the manual calculations I was able to use a calculator, although this was time consuming, setting the starting point to “ans” allowed me to quickly get all the values of x by simply pressing the equals button. Autograph also allowed me to zoom in on roots, changing axes, etc, this helped make the process of finding roots and showing failure much easier.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics section.

## Found what you're looking for?

• Start learning 29% faster today
• 150,000+ documents available
• Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
• Join over 1.2 million students every month
• Accelerate your learning by 29%
• Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

# Related AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics essays

1.  5 star(s)

the overall gradient function, but I must find far more evidence than one solitary a value to give it any meaning. If this is the case, however, I think that when the co-efficient is 3, the whole gradient will be 3(nxn-1).

2. ## MEI numerical Methods

If I was to do this on a calculator, fixed point iteration would be fine as all you would have to do is continuously press the = as it is a recurrence relation. However to use a calculator for the method of bisection, would be very tedious as you would

1. ## Numerical solutions of equations

This is explained with a diagram of Rearrangement 1 and its iterative formula below. This failure is shown graphically in Figure 6: Rearrangement 1: 0= x5+4x2-2 -x5= 4x2-2 x5= -4x2+2 x= (-4x2+2)1/5 The iterative formula is: xn+1= (-4xn2+2)1/5 From the graph above and from Figures 6 I can see that

2. ## C3 Numerical Solutions to Equations

= -1.47*10^-6. f(- 2.72115744) = 8.29*10^-7. Therefore there is a root as the function is continuous. f(x)=0 can be rearranged into the form x=g(x)=(x4-2x�+5x�-7x-2)0.2 The x=g(x) iterations are applied to give the results: Therefore x = -2.72115745 � 0.000000005 f(- 2.72115746) = -1.47*10^-6. f(- 2.72115744)

1. ## Solving Equations. Three numerical methods are discussed in this investigation. There are advantages and ...

Other 2 root are also found: Target root 2: n xn f(xn) f'(x) f'(xn) f(xn)/f'(xn) xn+1 1 -1 -0.5 3x2+6x+0.5 -2.5 0.2 -1.2 2 -1.2 -0.008 3x2+6x+0.5 -2.38 0.003361345 -1.203361345 3 -1.203361 -6.81716E-06 3x2+6x+0.5 -2.37593 2.86926E-06 -1.203364214 4 -1.203364 -5.02265E-12 3x2+6x+0.5 -2.37593 2.11397E-12 -1.203364 5 -1.203364 0 3x2+6x+0.5 -2.37593 0

2. ## Numerical integration can be described as set of algorithms for calculating the numerical value ...

of the absolute error of M16. This can be represented on a number line with the Mn getting closer to the exact value as n increases. From the number line below, we can see that each gap is a quarter to the one on its right; hence the mid-point rule is an overestimate.

1. ## C3 Coursework: Numerical Methods

This gives a second estimate of 1.63. It is possible to iterate again to find a more accurate estimate of the root at point C. The tangent to the point x=1.63 crosses the x axis at the point x=1.472. This gives a third estimate of 1.474. The tangent to the point 1.474 crosses the x axis at the point 1.442.

2. ## C3 COURSEWORK - comparing methods of solving functions

Also, if the too roots are too close together, we might miss the other two after finding the first one. Consequently, we would be unlikely to seach further in the intervals. Despite the fact that x=g(x) method also involved some calculations, it?s not the quickest way to find all the • Over 160,000 pieces
of student written work
• Annotated by
experienced teachers
• Ideas and feedback to 