1996
DOI: 10.1137/0733019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Symplectic Partitioned Runge–Kutta Methods for Constrained Hamiltonian Systems

Abstract: This article deals with the numerical treatment of Hamiltonian systems with holonomic constraints.A class of partitioned Runge-Kutta methods, consisting of the couples of s-stage Lobatto IIIA and Lobatto IIIB methods, has been discovered to solve these problems efficiently. These methods are symplectic, preserve all underlying constraints, and are superconvergent with order 2s-2. For separable Hamiltonians of the form H (q, p) 1 / 2 prM-p + U (q) the Rattle algorithm based on the Verlet method was up to now th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
105
0
2

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(108 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
105
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…One would like to integrate an index-K DAE on M or an index-K + 1 DAE on a symplectic embedding of M so as to preserve the constraints and ı M K ω. Finally, we mention another class of integrators for the holonomic case, known as spark, for Symplectic Partitioned Additive Runge-Kutta [9]. These generalise RATTLE to higher order.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…One would like to integrate an index-K DAE on M or an index-K + 1 DAE on a symplectic embedding of M so as to preserve the constraints and ı M K ω. Finally, we mention another class of integrators for the holonomic case, known as spark, for Symplectic Partitioned Additive Runge-Kutta [9]. These generalise RATTLE to higher order.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SHAKE and RATTLE are two commonly used numerical integration methods for Hamiltonian problems subject to holonomic constraints [16,1,11,9,15]. The difference between the two methods is that RATTLE preserves "hidden" constraints, whereas SHAKE does not.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(20) as well, although the differential forms are evaluated on solutions of Eq. (48) instead of (19). One can derive a DMSCL as well, although there seems to be no unique or natural way to do this.…”
Section: Term (Linear-nonlinear) Splittingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They were originally proposed for use in constrained systems, to which GRK did not appear to apply [19]. An exception is the lowest order Lobatto IIIA-IIIB or "generalized leapfrog" method, which has somewhat simpler implicit equations than the higher order methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This preserves the standard symplectic form restricted to the constraint surface. There are other algorithms that also do this: for simple mechanical systems (when the Hamiltonian is the sum of a quadratic kinetic energy and a potential), the "RATTLE" method of molecular dynamics [2] was shown to be symplectic in this sense by Leimkuhler and Skeel [11]; Jay [10] gives a class of suitable partitioned Runge-Kutta methods, one of which reduces to RATTLE in the case of a simple mechanical system. The problem for more general constraints is still open.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%