2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100743
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resolving systems of ordinary differential equations in a naphtha reforming process: Comparison of laplace transform and numerical methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 22 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Beyond the intrinsic complexity of solving a system of differential equations, even if the matrix coefficients are constant, the non-homogeneous term, i.e., present another layer of difficulty for the need of the particular solution. Many methods are used to solve the differential equation both analytically and numerically -for analytical solutions, Laplace and Fourier Transforms are options [1,6]; for numerical solutions, different explicit and implicit methods are used [7][8][9][10][11]. Each method presents an inherent disadvantage, such that integral transformation techniques suffer at finding the inverse transformation; while numerical methods have high computational cost and limited accuracy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beyond the intrinsic complexity of solving a system of differential equations, even if the matrix coefficients are constant, the non-homogeneous term, i.e., present another layer of difficulty for the need of the particular solution. Many methods are used to solve the differential equation both analytically and numerically -for analytical solutions, Laplace and Fourier Transforms are options [1,6]; for numerical solutions, different explicit and implicit methods are used [7][8][9][10][11]. Each method presents an inherent disadvantage, such that integral transformation techniques suffer at finding the inverse transformation; while numerical methods have high computational cost and limited accuracy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%