A Modified Runge–Kutta

Method for Nonlinear

Guang-Da Hu
Professor
Department of Mathematics,
Shanghai University,
Shanghai 200444, China
e-mail: ghu@hit.edu.cn
Dynamical Systems With
Conserved Quantities
In this paper, explicit Runge–Kutta methods are investigated for numerical solutions of
nonlinear dynamical systems with conserved quantities. The concept, e-preserving is
introduced to describe the conserved quantities being approximately retained. Then, a
modified version of explicit Runge–Kutta methods based on the optimization technique is
presented. With respect to the computational effort, the modified Runge–Kutta method is
superior to implicit numerical methods in the literature. The order of the modified
Runge–Kutta method is the same as the standard Runge–Kutta method, but it is superior
in preserving the conserved quantities to the standard one. Numerical experiments are
provided to illustrate the effectiveness of the modified Runge–Kutta method.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4036761]

1 Motivation
In this paper, we consider the numerical solutions of the follow-
ing system of nonlinear dynamical systems
_ ¼ f ðxðtÞÞ
xðtÞ (1)
where f : Rd ! Rd is continuously differentiable, xðtÞ 2 Rd is
state variable vector, and the initial vector x(0) ¼ x0 is known. We
always assume that system (1) has a unique solution. Furthermore,
assume that system (1) has m conserved quantities (constants of
motion or first integrals) [1], Ei ðxðtÞÞ, for i ¼ 1, 2,…, m
8
< E1 ðxðtÞÞ ¼ E1 ðxð0ÞÞ ¼ c1
… (2)
: Ref. [14]. Recently, a generalized multisymplectic method for the
Em ðxðtÞÞ ¼ Em ðxð0ÞÞ ¼ cm
i.e., the m functions Ei(x(t)) are conservative for any t  0.
The nonlinear dynamical system (1) with (2) appears in many
problems in science and engineering, for instance, mechanical
vibration, celestial mechanics, and Hamiltonian systems [1–4].
When the dynamical system (1) has only one conserved quan-
tity, it is a special case of system (1) with (2). A numerical method
that preserves the conserved quantity is usually called the energy-
preserving method. The energy-preserving method is one of the
geometric numerical integration methods [5,6]. All Runge–Kutta
(RK) methods preserve arbitrary linear invariants [5], and some
(the symplectic) RK methods preserve arbitrary quadratic invari-
ants [1,5]. However, no RK methods can preserve arbitrary poly-
nomial invariants of 3 deg or higher [7].
In order to numerically preserve the energy of nonlinear
dynamical systems, many numerical methods have been devel-
oped [1,5,8,9]. Projection methods are developed for the numeri-
cal solutions of differential equations on manifolds [10]. The
methods are also applied to dynamical system (1) with (2).
The basic principle of the projection RK methods for preserving-
energy is as follows. An arbitrary RK method is applied to
Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received
November 28, 2016; final manuscript received May 10, 2017; published online July
12, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Haiyan Hu.
system (1) to obtain a numerical solution, then project the numeri-
cal solution onto the manifold which is determined by the con-
served quantities (2). The methods require to solve a system of
nonlinear equations at each step. The projection method is implicit
even if an explicit RK scheme is applied [10]. Hence, the compu-
tational effort is large to implement projection RK methods. In
Ref. [11], the discrete gradient (DG) methods are applied to sys-
tem (1) with the conserved quantities (2). In Ref. [12], the Hamil-
tonian Boundary value methods (HBVMs) are studied for
preserving conserved quantities. Recently, Lie-group integration
scheme is discussed in Ref. [13] for preserving the angular
momentum and energy. All the above methods are implicit for
general nonlinear system (1) with (2). For the infinite dimensional
Hamiltonian systems, the multisymplectic method is presented in
infinite dimensional Hamiltonian systems with weak damping has
been developed in Refs. [15] and [16]. Some explicit schemes for
structure-preserving have been presented in Refs. [16–20].
With respect to the computational effort, explicit RK methods
are superior to implicit ones. However, the standard explicit
RK methods do not preserve the conserved quantities well. For
general nonlinear system (1) with conserved quantities (2), it is
impossible for any explicit RK methods to exactly preserve
the conserved quantities [1,5,7]. In order to devise explicit
RK methods for preserving the conserved quantities (2) of
general nonlinear system (1), the requirement Ei ðxn Þ ¼ Ei ðxð0ÞÞ
for i ¼ 1, 2,…, m should be relaxed.
The presented paper is an extension of Ref. [6] for the case of
multiple conserved quantities. We emphasize that we do not
require Ei ðxn Þ ¼ Ei ðxð0ÞÞ exactly holds for i ¼ 1, 2,…, but approx-
imately holds when an explicit RK method is applied to general
nonlinear system (1) with (2). We study a numerical method that
provides an approximation to the solution of system (1) preserving
the conserved quantities (2) in the sense that Ei(xn) approximates
to Ei(x(0)) for i ¼ 1, 2,…, m.
This paper is organized as follows. A modified version of
explicit RK methods is presented in Sec. 2. In Sec. 3, we compare
the modified version of the explicit RK methods with standard RK
method, the discrete gradient method, and the standard projection
method through numerical experiments. Conclusions are given in
Sec. 4.

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics SEPTEMBER 2017, Vol. 12 / 051026-1

C 2017 by ASME
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 2 A Modified Version of Explicit Eðxn Þ < e for n ¼ 1; 2; … (7)
Runge–Kutta Methods
In this section, considering system (1) with (2), we present a holds.
modified version of explicit Runge–Kutta methods such that the Remark 2.1. From Eqs. (2) and (3)
multiple conserved quantities of the numerical solution are as
close to their initial values as possible. EðxðtÞÞ ¼ 0 () Ei ¼ ci for i ¼ 1; 2; …; m:
Let
From Eqs. (7) and (3)
X
m pffiffi
EðxðtÞÞ ¼ ½Ei ðxðtÞÞ  ci 2 (3) EðxðtÞÞ < e ) jEi ðxn Þ  ci j < e for i ¼ 1; 2; …; m:
i¼1
The concept, e-preserving describes the multiple conserved quan-
where Ei(x(t)) are defined by Eq. (2). Then, an equivalent repre- tities being approximately preserved, i.e., if E(xn) is sufficiently
sentation of Eq. (2) is small, then Ei(xn) is sufficiently closed to ci for i ¼ 1, 2,…, m.
Remark 2.2. The symplectic methods [1] for Hamiltonian sys-
EðxðtÞÞ ¼ 0 (4) tems also approximately preserve multiple conserved quantities,
but they are implicit.
Now, we present a modified version of the pth order explicit
The gradient of E(x) is defined by RK method
 T 8
@Eð xÞ @Eð xÞ > Xs
rEð xÞ ¼ ; …; >
> x ¼ x þ h bi gi
@x1 @xd >
< nþ1 n
i¼1 ! (8)
> X s
where x ¼ [x1, x2,…, xd]T. According to Eq. (3), we have >
> g ¼ f x þ h a g ; i ¼ 1; 2; …; s
>
: i n ij j
j¼1
rEð xÞ
" m #T with a modified formula
X @Ei ð xÞ Xm
@Ei ð xÞ
¼ 2ðEi ð xðtÞÞ  ci Þ ; …; 2ðEi ð xðtÞÞ  ci Þ
i¼1
@x1 i¼1
@xd xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ (9)
(5)
where the parameter a > 0 will be determined through a line
rEðxÞ will be used to modify explicit Runge–Kutta methods to search technique [21].
approximately preserve m conserved quantities. Remark 2.3. The modified version Eqs. (8) and (9) of RK
Now, we consider the numerical solution of system (1) by a RK methods is explicit. It consists of two parts: the standard RK
method. Let xn denote an approximation (numerical solution) to method (8) and the modified formula (9) which is derived from
the solution x(tn) of system (1) at tn, i.e., xn  x(tn). The standard the gradient of the function E(x(t)). In formula (9), the factor hpþ1
s-stage RK method for system (1) is defined by the difference will guarantee the order of the modified version is the same as the
system standard RK method (8).
Now, we present the main result of this paper.
8 THEOREM 2.1. Assume that system (1) has m conserved quanti-
> Xs
>
> x ¼ x þ h bi gi ; ties (2) which are continuously differentiable. Let the modified RK
>
< nþ1 n
methods (8) and (9) be applied to system (1) with (2). If the step-
i¼1 ! (6)
> X s size h is sufficiently small and the gradient rEðxnþ1 Þ 6¼ 0, then
>
> ¼ þ i ¼ 1; 2; …; s
> g f x h a ij j ;
g
: i n
j¼1 x nþ1 Þ < Eðxnþ1 Þ
Eð (10)

Here h stands for a step-size and tn ¼ tn–1 þ h. When aij ¼ 0 for holds.
i  j, the RK method is explicit. Hereafter, we will only consider Proof. By formula (9)
explicit RK methods.
The aim of numerical computation is to seek a numerical xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ (11)
solution which is as close to the exact solution as possible.
Because a numerical solution is approximated, it is not necessary x nþ1 Þ at xnþ1 and (11), we
According to Taylor expansion of Eð
for the conserved quantities of the numerical solution to be pre- have
served exactly. It is reasonable that the conserved quantities of the
numerical solution are also approximated. In this paper, based on x nþ1 Þ ¼ Eðxnþ1 Þ  a½rEðxnþ1 ÞT ½rEðxnþ1 Þhpþ1 þ Oðh2ðpþ1Þ Þ
Eð
the idea, a modified version of explicit RK methods is presented. (12)
Assume that system (1) has m conserved quantities, Ei(x(t)),
which mean that Eq. (4) holds. We want to seek a modified ver- Since rE(xnþ1) 6¼ 0 and h is sufficiently small, we obtain
sion of explicit RK methods which generates a numerical solution
xn such that E(xn) is as close to E(x(0)) as possible. In addition, x nþ1 Þ < Eðxnþ1 Þ
Eð
the order of the modified version is the same as the standard RK
method. Since we are only concerned with explicit RK methods, it The proof is completed.
is emphasized that we only require that E(xn) ¼ E(x(0)) approxi- Remark 2.4. Inequality (10) in Theorem 2.1 shows that the
mately holds. modified RK methods (8) and (9) for system (1) are superior in
The following definition describes how E(xn) is closed to preserving m conserved quantities to the standard one (8).
E(x(0)). The following theorem is concerned with the order of the modi-
DEFINITION 2.1. Assume that a given positive constant e is suffi- fied Runge–Kutta method.
ciently small. An explicit numerical method is called e-preserving THEOREM 2.2. Assume that the localizing assumption xn ¼ x(tn)
if it generates a numerical solution xn such that holds. If ajjrEðxnþ1 Þjj is bounded, then, the order of the modified

051026-2 / Vol. 12, SEPTEMBER 2017 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 versions (8) and (9) of explicit RK methods is the same as the X
p X
p
standard one (6). xnþ1 ¼ aj xnj þ h bj fnj for n ¼ p; p þ 1; … (14)
Proof. Since the assumption x(tn) ¼ xn holds and formula (6) is j¼0 j¼0
p-order, we have
which is a p þ 1-step method for p  0, where fj denotes the value
xnþ1 ¼ xðtnþ1 Þ þ Oðhpþ1 Þ (13) f(tj, xj). The coefficients aj and bj are real and fully identify the
scheme; they are such that ap 6¼ 0 or bp 6¼ 0. We present a modified
Since akrEðxnþ1 Þk is bounded. According to Eqs. (9) and (13) version of explicit LM methods which consists of the standard
LM method (14) and the modified formula
xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ
¼ xðtnþ1 Þ þ Oðhpþ1 Þ  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ (15)
pþ1
¼ xðtnþ1 Þ þ Oðh Þ
For LM methods, we have similar results to Theorems 2.1 and
It means that xnþ1 and xnþ1 have the same order, p. The proof is 2.2.
completed.
Based on the modified RK methods (8) and (9), we propose the 3 Numerical Experiments
following computational procedure to numerically solve system
In this section, a typical conservative system is given to demon-
(1) with (2).
strate the effectiveness of the procedure derived based on the
modified RK methods (8) and (9). The modified version of the
classical fourth-order explicit RK method will be used, i.e.,
2.1 Computational Procedure
8
>
> h
Step 1. Assume that the initial x0. Choose e > 0, the number of >
> xnþ1 ¼ xn þ ðg1 þ 2g2 þ 2g3 þ g4 Þ
>
> 6
steps N and the step-size h. Let n ¼ 0. Compute ci ¼ Ei(x0) for >
>
>
> g ¼ f ðx Þ
i ¼ 1, 2,…, m. >
> 1

n

>
<
Step 2. If n ¼ N, then end the procedure; else compute xnþ1 by h
the explicit RK method (8) and E(xnþ1) by Eq. (3). g2 ¼ f xn þ g1 (16)
>
> 2
Step 3. If E(xnþ1) < e, then n ¼ n þ 1 and go to step 2; else go to >
>  
>
> h
step 4. >
> g3 ¼ f xn þ g2
>
> 2
Step 4. Seek an such that >
>
>
: g ¼ f ðx þ hg Þ
4 n 3
Eðxnþ1  hpþ1 an rEðxnþ1 ÞÞ ¼ mina Eðxnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 ÞÞ
with
where the parameter a > 0 is determined through the bisection
xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 arEðxnþ1 Þ (17)
method [21]. Compute
We will compare the modified versions (16) and (17) with the
xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1  hpþ1 an rEðxnþ1 Þ fourth-order classical RK method (16). We also compare the
modified versions (16) and (17) with the discrete gradient method
Set xnþ1 ¼ xnþ1 and compute E(xnþ1). Go to step 3. [11] and the standard projection RK method [10] in terms of com-
Remark 2.5. According to the above procedure, one can obtain putational time, respectively. The fourth-order classical RK
the numerical solution xn ; n ¼ 1; 2; …; N such that Eð
x n Þ < e, method (16) is also the underlying scheme of the discrete gradient
which means that method and the standard projection RK method in the numerical
experiments. When numerical solutions generated by several
pffiffi methods are drawn in one figure, the exact phase portrait is
jEi ðxn Þ  ci Þj < e denoted by solid line, the modified RK by *, the discrete gradient
by , and the standard RK by dotted line, respectively. All the
holds for i ¼ 1, 2,…, m. We know that the above procedure is computations are carried out by means of MATLAB.
e-preserving by Definition 2.1. Example [4]. Consider a gyroscope model described by Euler’s
Remark 2.6. We have to point out that Theorem 2.1 is only a dynamics equation
local property of the modified formula. It is a further topic to 8
study the efficiency of the above computational procedure. < I1 x_ 1 ¼ ðI2  I3 Þx2 x3
>
Remark 2.7. In the above computational procedure, the process I2 x_ 2 ¼ ðI3  I1 Þx3 x1 (18)
of modifying a standard RK method for preserving approximately >
:
I3 x_ 3 ¼ ðI1  I2 Þx1 x2
the multiple conserved quantities can be thought as an uncon-
strained optimization. The modified process is implemented by
the steepest descend method. This system preserves the energy
Remark 2.8. Now, compare our proposed method with the
standard projection method as follows. The modified process of 1 2 
E1 ðtÞ ¼ I1 x1 þ I2 x22 þ I3 x23
our method is an unconstrained optimization problem which is 2
dimension d. However, the modified process of the standard
projection method is a constrained optimization problem which is and the angular momentum
dimension d þ m.
Remark 2.9. Similar to the modified version of explicit
Runge–Kutta method, we may obtain a modified version of E2 ðtÞ ¼ ðI1 x1 Þ2 þ ðI2 x2 Þ2 þ ðI3 x3 Þ2
explicit linear multistep (LM) methods with formula (9). Consider
the standard LM method for system (1) that is defined by the The system has two first integrals E1(t) and E2(t). They are
difference system independent.

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics SEPTEMBER 2017, Vol. 12 / 051026-3

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 1 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x2 Fig. 3 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x2–x3
plane for h 5 0.05 plane for h 5 0.05

Fig. 2 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x3

plane for h 5 0.05 Fig. 4 The energy function E1(t) for h 5 0.05

Let the parameters of the system be I1 ¼ 1, I2 ¼ 2, and I3 ¼ 3.

Assume that the initial conditions x1(0) ¼ 3, x2(0) ¼ 2, and
x3(0) ¼ 1.
The phase diagrams of numerical solutions and the correspond-
ing first integrals by the modified RK method, the discrete gradi-
ent method, and the standard RK method will be shown for
various values of h in the following figures.
For the case, h ¼ 0.05, see Figs. 1–6.
Remark 3.1. Figures 1–3 show that the modified RK scheme
and the standard method produce almost alike phase trajectory for
large values of t in the case of h ¼ 0.05. But Figs. 4 and 5 show
the energy E1 decay and the angular momentum E2 decay using
the standard RK scheme are substantial, whereas the modified RK
method produces values of E1 and E2 that remain very near the
exact values over the entire time period. They mean that the
numerical solutions produced by the modified RK method are
better than the standard RK method for large values of t.
For the case, h ¼ 0.1, see Figs. 7–12.
For the case, h ¼ 0.2, see Figs. 13–18.
In Table 1, T stands for the computation time, and l is the aver-
age number of iterations within one step. For the DG method and
the standard projection RK method, the parameter e stands for the
tolerance of the Newton scheme. Fig. 5 The angular momentum function E2(t) for h 5 0.05

051026-4 / Vol. 12, SEPTEMBER 2017 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 6 an jj$Eðxn11 Þjj for h 5 0.05
Fig. 7 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x2
plane for h 5 0.1
Fig. 8 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x3
plane for h 5 0.1
Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics
Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 9 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x2–x3
plane for h 5 0.1
Remark 3.2. Figures 6, 12, and 18 show the values of
an jjrEðxnþ1 Þjj for various values of h. They mean that the values
of an jjrEðxnþ1 Þjj are small for this example.
Remark 3.3. For comparison, the values obtained using the
modified RK methods (16) and (17) and the standard RK (16) are
shown for different step-sizes h ¼ 0.05, 0.1, and h ¼ 0.2, respec-
tively. Both methods produce an accurate solution for small
values of t, but for large values, the standard method differs sig-
nificantly from the modified version. For this example, the energy
E1 decay and the angular momentum E2 decay using the standard
RK scheme are substantial, whereas the modified version pro-
duces values of E1 and E2 that oscillate but remain very near the
exact values over the entire time period. It is also apparent in the
figures that the states obtained from the modified RK method,
even for large values of t, are very near on the exact solution,
whereas the standard RK method provides poor approximations.
Remark 3.4. The above figures show that both the modified RK
schemes (16) and (17) and the discrete gradient method preserve
the two first integrals, E1 and E2 for large values of t in the case of
various values of h. The numerical solutions approximate by the
two methods the exact solution with good quality.
Remark 3.5. The computation time of the three methods is
given in Table 1. Table 1 shows that the modified RK method is
faster than the discrete gradient method and the standard projec-
tion RK method.
Fig. 10 The energy function E1(t) for h 5 0.1
SEPTEMBER 2017, Vol. 12 / 051026-5
 Fig. 11 The angular momentum function E2(t) for h 5 0.1
Fig. 14 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x3
plane for h 5 0.2

Fig. 12 an jj$Eðxn11 Þjj for h 5 0.1

Fig. 15 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x2–x3
plane for h 5 0.2

Fig. 13 The projection of the phase trajectory on the x1–x2

plane for h 5 0.2 Fig. 16 The energy function E1(t) for h 5 0.2

051026-6 / Vol. 12, SEPTEMBER 2017 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 modified version of explicit Runge–Kutta methods is presented.
Since the modified Runge–Kutta method is explicit, with respect
to the computational effort, it is superior to the implicit numerical
methods in the literature. The order of the modified Runge–Kutta
method is the same as the standard Runge–Kutta method, but it is
superior in preserving the conserved quantities to the standard
one. Numerical experiments are provided to illustrate the effec-
tiveness of the modified Runge–Kutta method with preserving
multiple conserved quantities.

Acknowledgment
The author wishes to thank the two anonymous reviewers for
their valuable comments and suggestions which are helpful to
improve this paper. One of the reviewers let the author know
some recent references. This work was supported by the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11371053 and
61372090).

Fig. 17 The angular momentum function E2(t) for h 5 0.2

References
[1] Leimkuhler, B., and Reich, S., 2004, Simulating Hamiltonian Dynamics, Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
[2] Greiner, W., 2010, Classical Mechanics: Systems of Particles and Hamiltonian
Dynamics, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
[3] Lee, T., Leok, M., and McClamroch, N. H., 2007, “Lie Variational Integrators
for the Full Body Problem in Orbital Mechanics,” Celestial Mech. Dyn. Astron.,
98(2), pp. 121–144.
[4] Li, S., 2007, “Introduction to Classical Mechanics,” University of Science and
Technology of China, Hefei, China (in Chinese).
[5] Griffiths, D. F., and Higham, D. J., 2010, Numerical Methods for Ordinary Dif-
ferential Equations, Springer-Verlag, London.
[6] Hu, G. D., 2014, “A Modified Version of Explicit Runge–Kutta Methods for
Energy-Preserving,” Kybernetika, 50(5), pp. 838–847.
[7] Feng, K., and Shang, Z., 1995, “Volume-Preserving Algorithms for Source-
Free Dynamical Systems,” Numer. Math., 77(4), pp. 451–463.
[8] Feng, K., 1992, “How to Compute Properly Newton’s Equation of Motion,”
Second Conference on Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations,
L. A. Ying and B. Y. Guo, eds., World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 15–22.
[9] Simo, J. C., Tarnow, N., and Wong, K. K., 1992, “Exact Energy-Momentum
Conserving Algorithms and Symplectic Schemes for Nonlinear Dynamics,”
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 100(1), pp. 63–116.
[10] Ascher, U. M., and Petzold, L. R., 1998, Computer Methods for Ordinary Dif-
ferential Equations and Differential-Algebraic Equations, SIAM, Philadelphia,
PA.
[11] McLachlan, R. I., Quispel, G. R. W., and Robidoux, N., 1999, “Geometric Inte-
gration Using Discrete Gradients,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A, 357(1754), pp.
1021–1046.
Fig. 18 an jj$Eðxn11 Þjj for h 5 0.2 [12] Brugnano, L., and Sun, Y., 2014, “Multiple Invariants Conserving
Runge–Kutta Type Methods for Hamiltonian Problems,” Numer. Algorithms,
65(3), pp. 611–632.
Table 1 The computation time [13] Terze, Z., M€ uller, A., and Zlatar, D., 2015, “An Angular Momentum and
Energy Conserving Lie-Group Integration Scheme for Rigid Body Rotational
Dynamics Originating From St€ ormer-Verlet Algorithm,” ASME J. Comput.
Euler equation Nonlinear Dyn., 10(5), p. 051005.
[14] Bridges, T. J., 1997, “Multi-Symplectic Structures and Wave Propagation,”
h ¼ 0.05; h ¼ 0.1; h ¼ 0.2; Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 121(1), pp. 147–190.
Parameters n ¼ 200,000 n ¼ 100,000 n ¼ 50,000 [15] Hu, W. P., Deng, Z. C., Han, S. M., and Zhang, W. R., 2013, “Generalized
Multi-Symplectic Integrators for a Class of Hamiltonian Nonlinear Wave
PDEs,” J. Comput. Phys., 235, pp. 394–406.
Modified RK T ¼ 8.9707 s T ¼ 4.4495 s T ¼ 2.4803 s
[16] Hu, W. P., Deng, Z. C., and Yin, T. T., 2017, “Almost Structure-Preserving
l ¼ 0.00072 l ¼ 0.0132 l ¼ 0.1430 Analysis for Weakly Linear Damping Nonlinear Schr€ odinger Equation With
e ¼ 106 e ¼ 105 e ¼ 104 Periodic Perturbation,” Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 42, pp.
DG T ¼ 24.9579 s T ¼ 12.2232 s T ¼ 7.0915 s 298–312.
e ¼ 106 e ¼ 105 e ¼ 104 [17] Bridges, T. J., and Reich, S., 2001, “Multi-Symplectic Integrators: Numerical
Schemes for Hamiltonian PDEs That Conserve Symplecticity,” Phys. Lett. A,
Projection RK T ¼ 10.8730 s T ¼ 5.6975 s T ¼ 3.1136 s 284(4–5), pp. 184–193.
l ¼ 1.0362 l ¼ 0.7161 l ¼ 1.5028 [18] Hu, W. P., Deng, Z. C., Wang, B., and Ouyang, H. J., 2013, “Chaos in an
e ¼ 106 e ¼ 105 e ¼ 104 Embedded Single-Walled Carbon Manotube,” Nonlinear Dyn., 72(1), pp.
389–398.
[19] Hu, W. P., Deng, Z. C., and Zhang, Y., 2014, “Multi-Symplectic Method for
Peakon-Antipeakon Collision of Quasi-Degasperis-Procesi Equation,” Comput.
Phys. Commun., 185(7), pp. 2020–2028.
[20] Hu, W. P., Li, Q. J., Jiang, X. H., and Deng, Z. C., 2017, “Coupling Dynamic
4 Conclusions Behaviors of Spatial Flexible Beam With Weak Damping,” Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng., epub.
In this paper, the concept, e-preserving is introduced to describe [21] Nocedal, J., and Wright, S. J., 1999, Numerical Optimization, Springer-Verlag,
multiple conserved quantities being approximately retained. A New York.

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics SEPTEMBER 2017, Vol. 12 / 051026-7

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use