arxiv: v1 [math.na] 2 Nov 2018

Transcription

1 A multipoint stress mixed finite element method for elasticity II: Quadrilateral grids Ilona Ambartsumyan Eldar Khattatov Jan Nordbotten Ivan Yotov October 30, 2018 arxiv: v1 [math.na] 2 Nov 2018 Abstract We develop a new multipoint stress mixed finite element method for linear elasticity with weak stress symmetry on quadrilateral grids. The method is developed on simplicial grids in part one of this sequence [3]. The method utilizes the lowest order Brezzi-Douglas-Marini finite element spaces for the stress and the trapezoidal quadrature rule in order to localize the interaction of degrees of freedom, which allows for local stress elimination around each vertex. We develop two variants of the method. The first uses a piecewise constant rotation and results in a cell-centered system for displacement and rotation. The second uses a piecewise linear rotation and trapezoidal quadrature rule for the asymmetry bilinear form. This allows for further elimination of the rotation, resulting in a cell-centered system for the displacement only. Stability and error analysis is performed for both methods. First-order convergence is established for all variables in their natural norms. A duality argument is employed to prove second order superconvergence of the displacement at the cell centers. Numerical results are presented in confirmation of the theory. 1 Introduction We develop two stress-displacement mixed finite element (MFE) methods for elasticity on quadrilateral grids that can be reduced to symmetric and positive definite cell centered systems. This is part two of a sequence of papers, with part one focusing on simplicial grids. The methods are referred to as multipoint stress mixed finite element (MSMFE) methods, adopting the terminology of the multipoint stress approximation (MPSA) method developed in [16, 19, 20]. Our approach is motivated by the multipoint flux mixed finite element (MFMFE) method [15, 25, 26] for Darcy flow, and its closely related multipoint flux approximation (MPFA) method [1, 2, 12, 13, 18]. The MFMFE method utilizes the lowest order Brezzi-Douglas-Marini BDM 1 spaces [9] on simplicial and quadrilateral grids, as well as an enhanced Brezzi-Douglas-Duran-Fortin BDDF 1 space [10] on hexahedral grids. The MSMFE methods we develop in this paper are based on the BDM 1 spaces on quadrilaterals. We consider the formulation with weakly imposed stress symmetry, for which there exist MFE spaces with BDM 1 degrees of freedom for the stress. In this formulation the symmetry of the stress is imposed weakly using a Lagrange multiplier, which is a skew-symmetric matrix and has a physical meaning of rotation. Our first method, referred to as MSMFE-0, is based on the spaces BDM 1 Q 0 Q 0 developed in [5, 8], using BDM 1 stress and piecewise constant displacement and rotation. The BDM 1 space has two normal degrees of freedom per edge, which can be associated with the two vertices. An application Department of Mathematics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA; {ila6@pitt.edu, elk58@pitt.edu, yotov@math.pitt.edu}. Partially supported by DOE grant DE-FG02-04ER25618 and NSF grants DMS and DMS Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; {ailona@austin.utexas.edu, ekhattatov@austin.utexas.edu}. Department of Mathematics, University of Bergen, Bergen, 7803, Norway; {Jan.Nordbotten@uib.no}. Funded in part through Norwegian Research Council grants , ,

2 of the trapezoidal quadrature rule for the stress bilinear form results in localizing the interaction of stress degrees of freedom around mesh vertices. The stress is then locally eliminated and the method is reduced to a symmetric and positive definite cell centered system for the displacement and rotation. Our second method, MSMFE-1, is based on the spaces BDM 1 Q 0 Q 1, with continuous bilinear rotation. To the best of our knowledge, these spaces have not been studied in the literature. In this method we employ the trapezoidal quadrature rule both for the stress and the asymmetry bilinear forms. This allows for further local elimination of the rotation after the initial stress elimination, resulting in a symmetric and positive definite cell centered system for the displacement only. We develop stability and error analysis for the two methods. The stability arguments follow the framework established in [5], with modifications to account for the quadrature rules. The argument in [5] explores connections between stable mixed elasticity elements and stable mixed Stokes and Darcy elements. In the case of the MSMFE-0 method, the two stable pairs are SS 2 Q 0 for Stokes and BDM 1 Q 0 for Darcy. Since the only term with quadrature is the stress bilinear form, the stability argument in [5] can be modified in a relatively straightforward way. Proving stability of the MSMFE-1 method is more difficult. In this case the Stokes pair is SS 2 Q 1. The difficulty comes from the fact that the quadrature rule is also applied to the asymmetry bilinear forms, which necessitates establishing an inf-sup condition for SS 2 Q 1 with trapezoidal quadrature in the divergence bilinear form. We do this by a macroelement argument motivated by [22] under a smoothness assumption on the grid given in (M2) in Section We note that the proof is very different from the argument in part one on simplices, since here the local inf-sup condition does not hold for vectors that are zero on the boundary of the macroelement. We proceed with establishing first order convergence for the stress in the H(div)-norm and for the displacement and rotation in the L 2 -norm for both methods on elements that are O(h 2 )- perturbations of parallelograms. This restriction is similar to the one in symmetric MPFA and MFMFE methods [17, 26]. Again, the arguments are very different from the simplicial case, since the map to the reference element is non-affine (bilinear), which complicates the estimation of the quadrature error. We further employ a duality argument to prove second order superconvergence of the displacement at the cell centers. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The model problem and its MFE approximation are presented in Section 2. The two methods and their stability are developed in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. The error analysis is performed in Section 5. Numerical results are presented in Section 6. 2 Model problem and its MFE approximation Let Ω be a simply connected bounded polygonal domain of R 2 occupied by a linearly elastic body. We write M, S and N for the spaces of 2 2 matrices, symmetric matrices and skew-symmetric matrices, all over the field of real numbers, respectively. The material properties are described at each point x Ω by a compliance tensor A = A(x), which is a symmetric, bounded and uniformly positive definite linear operator acting from S to S. We also assume that an extension of A to an operator M M still possesses the above properties. We will utilize the usual divergence operator div for vector fields. When applied to a matrix field, it produces a vector field by taking the divergence of each row. We will also use the curl operator defined as curl φ = ( 2 φ, 1 φ) for a scalar function φ. Consequently, for a vector field, the curl operator produces a matrix field, by acting row-wise. Throughout the paper, C denotes a generic positive constant that is independent of the discretization parameter h. We will also use the following standard notation. For a domain G R 2, the L 2 (G) inner product and norm for scalar and vector valued functions are denoted (, ) G and G, respectively. The norms and seminorms of the Sobolev spaces W k,p (G), k R, p > 0 are denoted by k,p,g and k,p,g, respectively. The norms and seminorms of the Hilbert spaces H k (G) are denoted by k,g and k,g, respectively. We omit G in the subscript if G = Ω. For a section of the domain or element boundary S we write, S and S for the L 2 (S) inner product (or duality pairing) and norm, respectively. 2

3 We will also use the space H(div; Ω) = {v L 2 (Ω, R 2 ) : div v L 2 (Ω)} equipped with the norm v div = ( v 2 + div v 2) 1/2. Given a vector field f on Ω representing body forces, equations of static elasticity in Hellinger-Reissner form determine the stress σ and the displacement u satisfying the constitutive and equilibrium equations respectively: together with the boundary conditions Aσ = ɛ(u), div σ = f in Ω, (2.1) u = g on Γ D, σ n = 0 on Γ N, (2.2) where ɛ(u) = 1 ( 2 u + ( u) T ) and Ω = Γ D Γ N. We assume for simplicity that Γ D. We consider a weak formulation for (2.1) (2.2), in which the stress symmetry is imposed weakly, using the Lagrange multiplier γ = Skew( u), Skew(τ) = 1 2 (τ τ T ), from the space of skew-symmetric matrices: find (σ, u, γ) X V W such that: where the corresponding spaces are (Aσ, τ) + (u, div τ) + (γ, τ) = g, τ n ΓD, τ X, (2.3) (div σ, v) = (f, v), v V, (2.4) (σ, ξ) = 0, ξ W, (2.5) X = {τ H(div, Ω, M) : τ n = 0 on Γ N }, V = L 2 (Ω, R 2 ), W = L 2 (Ω, N). Problem (2.3) (2.5) has a unique solution [7]. 2.1 Mixed finite element method Let T h be a shape-regular and quasi-uniform quadrilateral partition of Ω [11], with h = max E Th diam(e). For any element E T h there exists a bilinear bijection mapping F E : Ê E, where Ê = [ 1, 1]2 is the reference square. Denote the Jacobian matrix by DF E and let J E = det(df E ). For x = F E (ˆx) we have DF 1 E (x) = (DF E) 1 (ˆx), J F 1 E (x) = 1 J E (ˆx). Let Ê has vertices ˆr 1 = (0, 0) T, ˆr 2 = (1, 0) T, ˆr 3 = (1, 1) T and ˆr 4 = (0, 1) T with unit outward normal vectors to the edges denoted by ˆn i, i = 1,..., 4, see Figure 1. We denote by r i = (x i, y i ) T, i = 1,..., 4, the corresponding vertices of the element E, and by n i, i = 1,..., 4, the corresponding unit outward normal vectors. The bilinear mapping F E and its Jacobian matrix are given by F E (ˆr) = r 1 + r 21ˆx + r 41 ŷ + (r 34 r 21 )ˆxŷ, (2.6) DF E = [r 21, r 41 ] + [(r 34 r 21 )ŷ, (r 34 r 21 )ˆx], (2.7) where r ij = r i r j. It is easy to see that the shape-regularity and quasi-uniformity of the grids imply that E T h, DF E 0,, Ê h, 1 DF E 0,,Ê h 1, J E 0,, Ê h2 and J F 1 0,, Ê h 2, (2.8) E where the notation a b means that there exist positive constants c 0, c 1 independent of h such that c 0 b a c 1 b. 3

4 ˆχ ˆχ ˆχ ˆr 4 ˆr 3 41 ˆχ 31 F E χ41 r 4 χ 42 χ 32 χ31 r 3 χ 22 r 2 χ 21 stress displacement rotation ˆχ 11 ˆr 1 ˆr 2 ˆχ 21 ˆχ 12 ˆχ 22 χ r 11 1 χ 12 Figure 1: Degrees of freedom of X h V h W 1 h. The finite element spaces X h V h W k h X V W are the triple (BDM 1) 2 (Q 0 ) 2 (Q k ) 2 2,skew, k = 0, 1, where Q k denotes the space of polynomials of degree at most k in each variable and each row of an element of X h is a vector in BDM 1. On the reference square the spaces are defined as ˆX(Ê) ) ( ) (P = 1 (Ê)2 + r 1 curl(ˆx 2 ŷ) + s 1 curl(ˆxŷ 2 ) P 1 (Ê)2 + r 2 curl(ˆx 2 ŷ) + s 2 curl(ˆxŷ 2 ) ( α1ˆx + β = 1 ŷ + γ 1 + r 1ˆx 2 + 2s 1ˆxŷ α 2ˆx + β 2 ŷ + γ 2 2r 1ˆxŷ s 1 ŷ 2 ) α 3ˆx + β 3 ŷ + γ 3 + r 2ˆx 2 + 2s 2ˆxŷ α 4ˆx + β 4 ŷ + γ 4 2r 2ˆxŷ s 2 ŷ 2, (2.9) ˆV (Ê) = (Q 0 (Ê) ) 2, Ŵ k (Ê) = ( 0 p p 0 ), p Q k (Ê) for k = 0, 1, where α i, β i, γ i, r i, s i are real constants. Note that div ˆX(Ê) = ˆV (Ê) and for all ˆτ ˆX(Ê), ˆτ n ê P 1 (ê) 2 on any edge ê of Ê. It is well known [9, 10] that the degrees of freedom of BDM1(Ê) can be chosen as the values of the normal components at any two points on each edge ê Ê. In this work we choose these points to be the vertices of ê, see Figure 1. This is motivated by the trapezoidal quadrature rule, introduced in the next section. The spaces on any element E T h are defined via the transformations τ P ˆτ : τ T = 1 DF E ˆτ T F 1 1 E, v ˆv : v = ˆv FE J, ξ ˆξ : ξ = ˆξ F 1 E, (2.10) E where τ X(E), v V (E), and ξ W(E). Note that the Piola transformation (applied row-by-row) is used for X(E). It preserves the normal components of the stress tensor on edges, and it satisfies, for all τ X(E), v V (E), and φ H 1 (E), (div τ, v) E = (div ˆτ, ˆv)Ê, τ n e, v e = ˆτ ˆnê, ˆv ê, and curl φ P curl ˆφ. (2.11) The spaces on T h are defined by X h = {τ X : τ E P ˆτ, ˆτ ˆX( Ê) E T h }, V h = {v V : v E ˆv, ˆv ˆV (Ê) E T h}, (2.12) W k h = {ξ W : ξ E ˆξ, ˆξ Ŵk (Ê) E T h}. Note that W 1 h H1 (Ω), since it contains continuous piecewise Q 1 functions. The MFE method for (2.3) (2.5) is: find (σ h, u h, γ h ) X h V h W k h such that (Aσ h, τ) + (u h, div τ) + (γ h, τ) = g, τn ΓD, τ X h, (2.13) (div σ h, v) = (f, v), v V h, (2.14) (σ h, ξ) = 0, ξ W k h. (2.15) It is shown in [5] that the method (2.13) (2.15) in the case k = 0 has a unique solution and it is first order accurate for all variables in their corresponding norms. The framework from [5] can be used to analyze the case k = 1. A drawback of the method is that the resulting algebraic problem is a coupled stressdisplacement-rotation system of a saddle point type. In this paper we develop two methods that utilize a quadrature rule and can be reduced to cell-centered systems for displacement-rotation and displacement only, respectively. 4

5 2.2 A quadrature rule Let ϕ and ψ be continuous functions on Ω. We denote by (ϕ, ψ) Q the application of the element-wise tensor product trapezoidal quadrature rule for computing (ϕ, ψ). The integration on any element E is performed by mapping to the reference element Ê. For τ, χ X h, we have E Aτ : χ dx = Ê Â 1 J E ˆτDF T E : 1 J E ˆχDF T E J E dˆx = The quadrature rule on an element E is then defined as (Aτ, χ) Q,E (ˆτ 1 DF E T, ˆχDF E T ) J ˆQ, Ê Ê E 4 Ê Âˆτ 1 J E DF T E : ˆχDF T E dˆx. 1 Â(ˆr i )ˆτ(ˆr i ) J E (ˆr i ) DF E T (ˆr i ) : ˆχ(ˆr i )DF E T (ˆr i ). (2.16) i=1 The global quadrature rule is defined as (Aτ, χ) Q E T h (Aτ, χ) Q,E. We note that the quadrature rule can be defined directly on a physical element E: (Aτ, χ) Q = 1 2 T i A(r i )τ(r i ) : χ(r i ), (2.17) i=1 where T i is the area of triangle formed by the two edges sharing r i. Recall that the stress degrees of freedom are the two normal components per edge evaluated at the vertices, see Figure 1. For an element vertex r i, the tensor χ(r i ) is uniquely determined by its normal components to the two edges that share that vertex. Since the basis functions associated with a vertex are zero at all other vertices, the quadrature rule (2.16) decouples the degrees of freedom associated with a vertex from the rest of the degrees of freedom, which allows for local stress elimination. We also employ the trapezoidal quadrature rule for the stress-rotation bilinear forms in the case of bilinear rotations. For τ X h, ξ W 1 h, we have (τ, ξ) Q,E ( ) 1 ˆτDF E T, J ˆξJ E Ê E ˆQ,Ê 4 ˆτ(ˆr i )DF E (ˆr i ) T : ˆξ(ˆr i ). (2.18) The next lemma shows that the quadrature rule (2.16) produces a coercive bilinear form. i=1 Lemma 2.1. The bilinear form (Aτ, χ) Q is an inner product on X h and (Aτ, τ) 1/2 Q equivalent to, i.e., there exist constants 0 < α 0 α 1 independent of h such that is a norm in X h Furthermore, (ξ, ξ) 1/2 Q α 0 τ 2 (Aτ, τ) Q α 1 τ 2 τ X h. (2.19) is a norm in W1 h equivalent to, and τ X h, ξ W 1 h, (τ, ξ) Q C τ ξ. Proof. The proof follows the argument of Lemma 2.2 in [3], using (2.17). 3 The multipoint stress mixed finite element method with constant rotations (MSMFE-0) Let P 0 be the L 2 -orthogonal projection onto X RT h on the trace of T h on Ω: n, the space of piecewise constant vector-valued functions φ L 2 ( Ω), φ P 0 φ, τ n Ω = 0, τ X RT h. (3.1) 5

6 p 8 p 9 p 7 E 4 E 3 u 4 u 3 E σ 5, σ 6 p 4 p σ 3, σ 4 6 σ 7, σ 8 p 3 σ u u 1, σ E 2 E 1 p 5 p 1 p 2 Figure 2: Finite elements sharing a vertex (left) and displacement stencil (right) Our first method, referred to as MSMFE-0, is: find σ h X h, u h V h, and γ h W 0 h such that (Aσ h, τ) Q + (u h, div τ) + (γ h, τ) = P 0 g, τ n ΓD, τ X h, (3.2) (div σ h, v) = (f, v), v V h, (3.3) (σ h, ξ) = 0, ξ W 0 h. (3.4) The Dirichlet data is incorporated into the scheme as P 0 g, which is necessary for the optimal approximation of the boundary condition term. Theorem 3.1. The method (3.2) (3.4) has a unique solution. Proof. Using classical stability theory of mixed finite element methods, the required Babuška-Brezzi stability conditions [10] are: (S1) There exists c 1 > 0 such that c 1 τ div (Aτ, τ) 1/2 Q (3.5) for τ X h satisfying (div τ, v) = 0 and (τ, ξ) = 0 for all (v, ξ) V h W 0 h. (S2) There exists c 2 > 0 such that inf 0 (v,ξ) V h W 0 h (div τ, v) + (τ, ξ) sup 0 τ X h τ div ( v + ξ ) c 2. (3.6) Using (2.11) and div ˆX(Ê) = ˆV (Ê), the condition (div τ, v) = 0, v V h implies that div τ = 0. Then (S1) follows from (2.19). The inf-sup condition (S2) has been shown in [5]. Remark 3.1. The MSMFE-0 method can be reduced to solving a cell-centered displacement-rotation system as follows. Since the quadrature rule (A, ) Q localizes the basis functions interaction around vertices, the matrix resulting from (Aσ h, τ) Q in (3.2) is block-diagonal with 2k 2k blocks, where k is the number of elements that share a vertex, see Figure 2 (left) for an example with k = 4. Therefore the stress σ h can be easily eliminated by solving small local systems. The resulting displacement-rotation system is cell-centered and symmetric and positive definite, see Figure 2 (right) for the displacement stencil (the rotation stencil is the same). The reader is referred to the discussion in Section 3.1 of [3] for details. While the MSMFE-0 method is more efficient than the original MFE method, further reduction in the system is not possible. In the next section we develop a method with bilinear rotations and a trapezoidal quadrature rule applied to the stress-rotation bilinear forms. This allows for further local elimination of the rotation, resulting in a cell-centered system for the displacement only. 6

7 4 The multipoint stress mixed finite element method with bilinear rotations (MSMFE-1) In the second method, referred to as MSMFE-1, we take k = 1 in (2.9) and apply the quadrature rule to both the stress bilinear form and the stress-rotation bilinear forms. The method is: find σ h X h, u h V h and γ h W 1 h such that (Aσ h, τ) Q + (u h, div τ) + (γ h, τ) Q = P 0 g, τ n ΓD, τ X h, (4.1) The stability conditions for the MSMFE-1 method are as follows: (div σ h, v) = (f, v), v V h, (4.2) (σ h, ξ) Q = 0, ξ W 1 h. (4.3) (S3) There exists c 3 > 0 such that c 3 τ 2 div (Aτ, τ) Q, for τ X h satisfying (div τ, v) = 0 and (τ, ξ) Q = 0 for all (v, ξ) V h W 1 h. (S4) There exists c 4 > 0 such that inf 0 (v,ξ) V h W 1 h (div τ, v) + (τ, ξ) Q sup 0 τ X h τ div ( v + ξ ) c 4. (4.4) 4.1 Well-posedness of the MSMFE-1 method The stability condition (S3) holds, since the spaces X h and V h are as in the MSMFE-0 method. However, (S4) is different, due to the quadrature rule in (τ, ξ) Q, and it needs to be verified. The next theorem, proved in [3], provides sufficient conditions for a triple X h V h W 1 h to satisfy (S4), where we adopt the notation b(q, w) = (div q, w) and b(q, w) Q = (div q, w) Q. Theorem 4.1. Suppose that S h H(div; Ω) and U h L 2 (Ω) satisfy inf 0 r U h b(z, r) sup 0 z S h z div r c 5, (4.5) that Q h H 1 (Ω, R 2 ) and W h L 2 (Ω) are such that (w, w) 1/2 Q is a norm in W h equivalent to w and inf 0 w W 1 h b(q, w) Q sup 0 q Q h q 1 w c 6. (4.6) and that curl Q h S h S h. (4.7) Then, X h = S h S h H(div; Ω, M), V h = U h U h L 2 (Ω, R 2 ) and W 1 h = {ξ : ξ = L 2 (Ω, N) satisfy (S4). ( ) } 0 w, w W w 0 h Remark 4.1. Condition (4.5) states that S h U h is a stable Darcy pair. Condition (4.6) states that Q h W h is a stable Stokes pair with quadrature. Lemma 4.1. Conditions (4.5) and (4.7) hold for X h V h W 1 h defined in (2.9) and (2.12). 7

8 Proof. According to the definition (2.9), we take S h = {z H(div; Ω) : z E P ẑ BDM1 (Ê), z n = 0 on Γ N}, U h = {r L 2 (Ω) : r E ˆr Q 0 (Ê)}, W h = {w H 1 (Ω) : w E ŵ Q 1 (Ê)}. We note that W h satisfies the norm equivalence (w, w) 1/2 Q w, see Lemma 2.1. The boundary condition in S h is needed to guarantee the essential boundary condition in X h on Γ N. Since BDM 1 Q 0 is a stable Darcy pair [10], (4.5) holds. Next, following the construction in [5], we take SS 2 (Ê) to be the reduced bi-quadratics (serendipity) space [11], and define the space Q h as SS 2 (Ê) = P 2(Ê) + span{ˆx2 ŷ, ˆxŷ 2 }, Q h = {q H 1 (Ω, R 2 ) : q i E ˆq i SS 2 (Ê), i = 1, 2, E T h, q t = 0 on Γ N }, (4.8) where t is the unit tangential vector on Ω. One can verify that curl SS 2 (Ê) BDM1(Ê). Due to (2.11), curl Q h S h S h, not considering the boundary condition on Γ N. Finally, since for q Q h we have q t = 0 on Γ N, then (curl q) n = 0 on Γ N, see [3, Lemma 4.2]. To prove (S4), it remains to show that (4.6) holds. It is shown in [22] that SS 2 Q 1 is a stable Stokes pair on rectangular grids. We need to verify that it is a stable Stokes pair with quadrature on quadrilaterals, which we do next The inf-sup condition for the Stokes problem We prove (4.6) using a modification of the macroelement technique presented in [22]. The idea is to establish first a local inf-sup condition and then combine locally constructed velocity vectors to prove the global inf-sup condition. We recall that in [22], it was sufficient to consider velocity functions that vanish on the macroelement boundary in order to control the pressures locally. However, due to the quadrature rule, this is not true in our case. We show how a similar result can be obtained without restricting the velocity basis functions on the macroelement boundary, under a smoothness assumption on the grid T h. We consider the span of all edge degrees of freedom of Q h (E) and denote it by Q e h (E). Let We make the following assumptions on the mesh. N E = {w W h (E) : b(q, w) Q,E = 0, q Q e h (E)}. (M1) Each element E has at most one edge on Γ N. (M2) The mesh size h is sufficiently small and there exists a constant C such that for every pair of neighboring elements E and Ẽ such that E or Ẽ is a non-parallelogram, and every pair of edges e E, ẽ Ẽ that share a vertex, r e rẽ R 2 Ch 2, where r e and rẽ are the vectors corresponding to e and ẽ, respectively, and R 2 vector norm. is the Euclidean Remark 4.2. Condition (M1) is needed to establish a local inf-sup condition. Condition (M2) is needed to combine the local results and prove the global inf-sup condition (4.6). We note that it is required only for non-parallelogram elements. It is a mesh smoothness condition. For example, it is satisfied if the mesh is generated by a C 2 map of a uniform reference grid. The condition on the mesh size h is given in the proof of Lemma

9 r4 q 3 r 3 r 4 q 3 r 3 q 4 q 2 q 4 q 2 r4 q 4 q 3 E r 3 q 2 r 1 r 2 q 1 r 1 r 2 Γ N r 1 q 1 r2 Ẽ r 1 r 2 Figure 3: Left: interior element; middle: element with bottom edge on Γ N ; right: an interior element, surrounded by four elements. Lemma 4.2. Let (M1) hold. If E is a parallelogram, then N E is one-dimensional, consisting of functions that are constant on E; otherwise N E = 0. Proof. For any q Q h (E), w W h (E), we have b(q, w) Q,E = (tr ( q), w) Q,E = 1 4 tr [ DF T E (ˆr j) ˆ ˆq(ˆr ] j ) ŵ(ˆr j )J E (ˆr j ). Consider first an element with no edges on Γ N. Denote the basis functions for Q e h (E) by q i = q n i + qt i, i = 1,..., 4, see Figure 3 (left). Without loss of generality, assume that the edge corresponding to q 1 is horizontally oriented, i.e., x 2 x 1 0, x 3 x 4 0, y 4 y 1 0, and y 3 y 2 0. A direct calculation gives b(q t 1, w) Q,E = (y 4 y 1 )w(r 1 ) + (y 2 y 3 )w(r 2 ), (4.9) b(q n 1, w) Q,E = (y 1 y 2 )w(r 1 ) + (y 2 y 1 )w(r 2 ), (4.10) b(q t 2, w) Q,E = (x 2 x 1 )w(r 2 ) + (x 4 x 3 )w(r 3 ), (4.11) b(q n 2, w) Q,E = (x 2 x 3 )w(r 2 ) + (x 3 x 2 )w(r 3 ), (4.12) b(q t 3, w) Q,E = (y 2 y 3 )w(r 3 ) + (y 4 y 1 )w(r 4 ), (4.13) b(q n 3, w) Q,E = (y 3 y 4 )w(r 3 ) + (y 4 y 3 )w(r 4 ). (4.14) b(q t 4, w) Q,E = (x 2 x 1 )w(r 1 ) + (x 4 x 3 )w(r 4 ), (4.15) b(q n 4, w) Q,E = (x 1 x 4 )w(r 1 ) + (x 4 x 1 )w(r 4 ). (4.16) Let us set the above quantities equal to zero. Consider the vertical edges of E. From (4.11), (4.15) we get w(r 2 ) = w(r 3 ) x 4 x 3 x 1 x 2, w(r 1 ) = w(r 4 ) x 4 x 3 x 1 x 2. (4.17) If x 2 x 3, we also get from (4.12) that w(r 2 ) = w(r 3 ). This together with (4.17) implies that w(r 1 ) = w(r 4 ). Similarly, if x 1 x 4, it follows from (4.16) that w(r 1 ) = w(r 4 ), and (4.17) implies that w(r 2 ) = w(r 3 ). Finally, if x 2 = x 3 and x 1 = x 4, we arrive to the same conclusion directly from (4.17). Next, consider the horizontal edges corresponding to q 1 and q 3. From (4.13) we get w(r 3 ) = w(r 4 ) y 1 y 4 y 2 y 3. (4.18) If y 3 y 4, (4.14) implies that w(r 3 ) = w(r 4 ). If y 1 y 2, it follows from (4.10) that w(r 1 ) = w(r 2 ). Otherwise, if y 1 = y 2 and y 3 = y 4, we obtain from (4.18) that w(r 3 ) = w(r 4 ). Hence, w must be constant on E. 9

10 We next consider the case when one of the edges of E is on Γ N, as shown on Figure 3 (middle). Since the above argument above did not use the condition (4.9), the conclusion still applies. Finally, if w is a non-zero constant in N E, setting the equations (4.10) (4.16) to zero implies that E is a parallelogram. Theorem 4.2. If (M1) (M2) are satisfied, then (4.6) holds. The proof of Theorem 4.2 is based on several auxiliary lemmas. Lemma 4.3. If (M1) holds, then there exists a constant β > 0 independent of h such that, T T h, b(q, w) Q,E sup β w E, w W h (E)/N E. 0 q Q e h (E) q 1,E Proof. The proof follows from Lemma 4.2 and a scaling argument, see [22, Lemma 3.1]. For E T h, let P E h denote the L2 -projection from W h (E) onto N E. Lemma 4.4. If (M1) and (M2) hold, then there exists a constant C 1 > 0, such that for every w W h and for every E T h that is either a non-parallelogram or a parallelogram that neighbors parallelograms, there exists q E Q e h (E) satisfying b(q E, w) Q C 1 (I P E h )w 2 E and q E 1 (I P E h )w E. (4.19) Proof. Let w W h. Due to Lemma 4.2, if E is not a parallelogram, then P E h w = 0 on E. Otherwise, P E h w is the mean value of w on E. Lemma 4.3 implies that for every E there exists q E Q e h (E) such that b(q E, w) Q,E = b(q E, (I P E h )w) Q,E C (I P E h )w 2 E and q E 1,E (I P E h )w E. (4.20) We note that q E does not vanish outside of E; however, we will show that under assumption (M2) b(q E, w) Q,Ω\E 0. (4.21) In order to prove (4.21) let us consider a neighboring element Ẽ, see Figure 3 (right). Let q E = 4 i=1 α iq i. We first consider a non-parallelogram E. Consider the tangential degree of freedom q1 t, associated with the edge shared by E and Ẽ. Using (4.9), we have b(q t 1, w) Q,E = (y 4 y 1 )w(r 1 ) + (y 2 y 3 )w(r 2 ) := δ1,jw(r t j ), (4.22) where δ1,1 t = (y 4 y 1 ), δ1,2 t = (y 2 y 3 ) and δ1,j t = 0 for j = 3, 4. For qn 1, using (4.10), we have b(q n 1, w) Q,E = (y 1 y 2 )w(r 1 ) + (y 2 y 1 )w(r 2 ) := Using a similar expression for the rest of the degrees of freedom, we obtain δ1,jw(r n j ). (4.23) b(q E, w) Q,E = α i b(q i, w) Q,E = i=1 α i δ i,j w(r j ), i=1 where δ i,j = δi,j n + δt i,j. We note that for all i, j, δ i,j = 0 or δ i,j = O(h). Using (4.13), we also compute b(q1, t w) Q, Ẽ = (y 1 ỹ 1 )w(r 1 ) + (ỹ 2 y 2 )w(r 2 ) := σ1,jw(r t j ), (4.24) 10

11 where σ1,1 t = (y 1 ỹ 1 ), σ1,2 t = (ỹ 2 y 2 ) and σ1,j t = 0 for j = 3, 4. Using (4.14), we have Therefore, b(q n 1, w) Q, Ẽ = (y 1 y 2 )w(r 1 ) + (y 2 y 1 )w(r 2 ) := σ1,jw(r n j ). (4.25) b(q E, w) Q, Ẽ = Moreover, due to assumption (M2), α i b(q i, w) Q, Ẽ = i=1 α i σ i,j w(r j ). i=1 σ i,j = δ i,j + θ i,j, with θ i,j = 0 if δ i,j = 0 and θ i,j Ch 2 otherwise. Indeed, consider, e.g., i = j = 1, then, by (M2), Therefore, we obtain σ 1,1 δ 1,1 = σ t 1,1 δ t 1,1 = (y 1 ỹ 1 ) (y 4 y 1 ) Ch 2. b(q E, w) Q, Ẽ = i=1 Ch 2 α i σ i,j w(r j ) = b(q E, w) Q,E + (w(r j )) 2 + i=1 using the first inequality in (4.20), that P E h w = 0, and that w 2 E h 2 i=1 α i θ i,j w(r j ) α i θ i,j w(r j ), (4.26) (w(r j )) 2, (4.27) which follows from the norm equivalence w E w Q,E stated in Lemma 2.1 and the shape regularity of the mesh. Finally, the second inequality in (4.20) and a scaling argument imply that for every i = 1,..., 4 there exist constants b i,k, k = 1,..., 4, independent of h such that α i = h Then, there exists a constant C independent of h such that α i θ i,j w(r j ) = h b i,k w(r k ) θ i,j w(r j ) Ch 3 i=1 i=1 k=1 b i,k w(r k ). (4.28) k=1 Combining (4.26) (4.29) and taking h C/ C, we obtain (4.21): b(q E, w) Q, Ẽ Ch2 (w(r j )) 2 Ch 3 (w(r j )) 2 (C Ch)h 2 (w(r j )) 2. (4.29) (w(r j ))

12 Next, consider the case of a parallelogram E with parallelogram neighbors. In this case, (4.22) and (4.24) give b(q t 1, w) Q,E = (y 4 y 1 )(w(r 1 ) w(r 2 )), b(q t 1, w) Q, Ẽ = (y 1 ỹ 1 )(w(r 1 ) w(r 2 )). (4.30) Similarly, (4.23) and (4.25) give b(q n 1, w) Q,E = (y 1 y 2 )(w(r 1 ) w(r 2 )), b(q n 1, w) Q, Ẽ = (y 1 y 2 )(w(r 1 ) w(r 2 )). Similar relationships hold for the rest of the basis functions. Therefore there exist positive constants c i, i = 1,..., 4, such that b(q i, w) Q, Ẽ = c ib(q i, w) Q,E. We can assume that α i b(q i, w) Q,E 0 for i = 1,..., 4, since, if α i b(q i, w) Q,E < 0, it can be omitted from the linear combination q E = 4 i=1 α iq i and the resulting q E would still satisfy (4.20). Therefore, (4.21) holds: b(q E, w) Q, Ẽ = α i b(q i, w) Q, Ẽ = i=1 c i α i b(q i, w) Q,E 0. The assertion of the lemma now follows from (4.20) and (4.21), where the second inequality in (4.19) follows from (4.28). We next note that the element norm equivalence (4.27) implies that for w W h, i=1 N W w 2 h 2 (w(r j )) 2, (4.31) where N W is the number of degrees of freedom of W h. Therefore, to prove (4.6), it is sufficient to control h 2 (w(r j )) 2. We will consider three sets of vertices and show that each set can be controlled. Let I 1 = {j : r j is a vertex of a non-parallelogram}, I 2 = {j : all elements sharing r j are parallelograms and at least one has a non-parallelogram neighbor}, I 3 = {j : all elements sharing r j are parallelograms with parallelogram neighbors}. Clearly the union of the three sets covers all vertices of the mesh. Lemma 4.5. If (M1) (M2) hold, there exists a constant C independent of h such that for every w W h, there exists q Q h such that b(q, w) Q Ch 2 (w(r j )) 2, q 1 w. (4.32) j I 1 I 2 Proof. If j I 1, Lemma 4.4 and (4.27) imply that there exists q j Q e h (E) such that b(q j, w) Q Ch 2 (w(r j )) 2, q j 1 w E, (4.33) where E is the non-parallelogram element with vertex r j. Next, consider j I 2. Let r k share an edge with r j. Note that its two neighboring elements are parallelograms. Denote them by E and Ẽ and let qt 1 be the tangential edge basis function. Using (4.30), we can take q j = ch(w(r j ) w(r k ))q1 t, which satisfies b( q j, w) Q Ch 2 (w(r j ) w(r k )) 2, q j 1 w E. (4.34) Let r k be the vertex that belongs to a non-parallelogram, denoted by E k. Then (4.33) implies that there exists q k Q e h (E k) such that b(q k, w) Q Ch 2 (w(r k )) 2, q k 1 w Ek. (4.35) 12

13 Let q j = q j + q k. Due to (4.34) and (4.35), q j satisfies b(q j, w) Q Ch 2 (w(r j )) 2, q j 1 w E Ek. (4.36) Finally, q Q h defined as the sum of the functions constructed in (4.33) and (4.36) satisfies (4.32). We now consider the set of vertices I 3. If r j and r k are two vertices in the set that share an edge, (4.34) implies that if one of them is controlled, then so is the other. Therefore it is enough to consider a subset of vertices that do not share an edge, which we denote by Ĩ3. For each vertex r j, let M j be the union of elements that share r j. We note that the set S = {M j : j Ĩ3} is non-overlapping. Let M = j Ĩ 3 M j. For M S, let Q e h (M) be the span of all edge degrees of freedom of Q h(m) and let N M = {w W h (M) : b(q, w) Q,M = 0, q Q e h (M)}. Recall that all elements in M are parallelograms. The argument of Lemma 4.2 can be easily extended to show that N M consists of constant functions. For M S, let P M h denote the L2 -projection from W h (M) onto N M. Since the neighbors of all elements in M are parallelograms, Lemma 4.4 implies that for any w W h, there exists q M Q e h (M) satisfying Let b(q M, w) Q C 1 (I P M h )w 2 M and q M 1 (I P M h )w M. (4.37) M h = {µ L 2 (Ω) : µ M N M, M S, µ = 0 otherwise}. Let P h be the L 2 -projection from W h onto M h. Then (4.37) implies that for any w W h, there exists q Q h satisfying b( q, w) Q C 1 (I P h )w 2 M and q 1 (I P h )w M. (4.38) The next lemma shows that P h w can also be controlled. Lemma 4.6. If (M1) holds, there exists a constant C 2 > 0 such that for every w W h there exists g Q h such that b(g, P h w) Q = P h w 2 M and g 1 C 2 P h w M. Proof. Let w W h be arbitrary. Since P h w L 2 (Ω), there exists z H 1 (Ω) such that div z = P h w and z 1 C P h w M. Following [22, Lemma 3.3], there exists an operator I h : H 1 (Ω) Q h such that (div z, µ) = b(i h z, µ), µ M h, and I h z 1 C z 1, where Q h is the subspace of Q h consisting of element-wise mapped bilinear functions. We note that the argument in [22, Lemma 3.3] requires that the interfaces between macroelements have at least two edges. Recall that our macroelements consist of all parallelograms sharing a vertex and their neighbors are also parallelograms. We can therefore choose the subset Ĩ3 appropriately to satisfy this requirement. Here we also consider Ω \ M as one macroelement. We next note that for q Q h and µ M h, on any E T h, b(q, µ) E = tr (DF T ˆ ˆq)ˆµJ E E dˆx. Ê A direct calculation shows that the integrated quantity on Ê is bilinear, and hence, using that the quadrature rule is exact for bilinears, b(i h z, µ) = b(i h z, µ) Q. The proof is completed by taking g = I h z. 13

14 Lemma 4.7. If (M1) holds, there exists a constant C independent of h such that for every w W h, there exists q Q h such that b(q, w) Q Ch 2 j I 3 (w(r j )) 2, q 1 w. (4.39) Proof. Let w W h be given, and let q Q h, g Q h, C 1 and C 2 be as in (4.38) and Lemma 4.6. Set q = q + δg, where δ = 2C 1 (1 + C 2 2 ) 1. We then have b(q, w) Q = b( q, w) Q + δb(g, w) Q = b( q, w) Q + δb(g, P h w) Q + δb(g, (I P h )w) Q C 1 (I P h )w 2 M + δ P h w 2 M δ g 1 (I P h )w M C 1 (1 + C 2 2) 1 w 2 M, and q 1 (I P h )w M + δc 2 P h w M C w M. The assertion of the lemma follows from (4.27). We are now ready to prove the main result stated in Theorem 4.2: Proof of Theorem 4.2. The assertion of the theorem follows from Lemma 4.5, Lemma 4.7, and (4.31). We conclude with the solvability result for the MSMFE-1 method (4.1)-(4.3). Theorem 4.3. Under the assumptions (M1) (M2), there exists a unique solution of (4.1)-(4.3). Proof. The existence and uniqueness of a solution to (4.1)-(4.3) follows from (S3) and (S4). Lemma 2.1 implies the coercivity condition (S3). Assuming (M1) (M2), the inf-sup condition (S4) follows from a combination of Theorem 4.1, Lemma 4.1, and Theorem Reduction to a cell-centered displacement system of the MSMFE-1 method The algebraic system that arises from (4.1)-(4.3) is of the form A σσ A T σu A T σγ σ g A σu 0 0 u = f. (4.40) A σγ 0 0 γ 0 As in the MSMFE-0 method, the quadrature rule in (Aσ h, τ) Q in (4.1) localizes the basis functions interaction around vertices, so the matrix A σσ is block diagonal with 2k 2k blocks, where k is the number of elements that share a vertex. Therefore, σ h can be easily eliminated, resulting in the displacementrotation system ( Aσu A 1 A σγ A 1 σσa T σu σσa T σu A σu A 1 A σγ A 1 σσa T σγ σσa T σγ ) ( ) u = γ ( ) f. (4.41) h Furthermore, the quadrature rule in the stress-rotation bilinear forms (γ h, τ) Q and (σ h, ξ) Q also localizes the interaction around vertices, since there is one rotation basis function associated with each vertex. Therefore the matrix A σγ is block-diagonal with 1 2k blocks, resulting in a diagonal rotation matrix A σγ A 1 σσa T σγ. As a result, the rotation γ h can be trivially eliminated from (4.41), leading to the cellcentered displacement system ( Aσu A 1 σσa T σu A σu A 1 σσa T σγ(a σγ A 1 σσa T σγ) 1 A σγ A 1 σσa T σu) u = ˆf. (4.42) The above matrix is symmetric and positive definite, since it is a Schur complement of the symmetric and positive definite matrix in (4.41). We refer the reader to Section 4.2 of [3] for details. 5 Error estimates In this section we establish optimal convergence for all variables, as well as the superconvergence for the displacement. We start by providing several results that will be used in the analysis. 14

15 5.1 Preliminaries For the rest of the paper we assume that the quadrilateral elements are O(h 2 )-perturbations of parallelograms known as h 2 -parallelograms. In particular, with the notation from Figure 1, we assume that r 34 r 21 Ch 2. (5.1) Elements of this type are obtained by uniform refinements of a general quadrilateral grid or if the mesh is obtained by a smooth map. This is a standard assumption for the symmetric multipoint flux approximation method [26], required due to the reduced approximation properties of the BDM 1 space on general quadrilaterals [6]. If (5.1) holds, it is easy to check that DF E 1,, Ê Ch2 and 1 DF E J E Ch j 1, j = 1, 2. (5.2) j,, Ê In the analysis we will utilize several projection operators. It is known [9, 10, 24] that there exists a projection operator Π : X H 1 (Ω, M) X h such that The operator Π is defined locally on an element E by (div(πτ τ), v) = 0, v V h. (5.3) Πτ P ˆΠˆτ, (5.4) where ˆΠ is a reference ( element ) interpolant. ( We ) will also utilize the lowest order Raviart-Thomas space [10, 21]: ˆXRT (Ê) = α1 + β 1ˆx α3 + β 3ˆx. The degrees of freedom of ˆX RT (Ê) are the values of the α 2 + β 2 ŷ α 4 + β 4 ŷ normal components at the midpoints of the edges. A projection operator Π RT onto X RT h similar to (5.3) exists [10, 21], which satisfies for any edge e, It is also easy to see that Π RT and (Π RT τ τ)n e, χn e e = 0, satisfies χ X RT h. (5.5) div τ = div Π RT τ, τ X h (5.6) Π RT τ C τ, τ X h. (5.7) Let Q u h be a projection operator onto V h satisfying for any v L 2 (Ω, R 2 ), It follows from (2.11) that ( ˆQ uˆv ˆv, ŵ)ê = 0, ŵ ˆV (Ê), Qu h v = ˆQ uˆv F 1 E E T h. (5.8) (Q u h v v, div τ) = 0, τ X h. (5.9) Let Q γ h be the L2 -orthogonal projection operator onto W h satisfying for any ξ L 2 (Ω, N), (Q γ h ξ ξ, ζ) = 0, ζ Wk h. (5.10) The next lemma summarizes the well-known approximation properties of the above operators. Lemma 5.1. There exists a constant C independent of h such that v Q u h v C v rh r, v H r (Ω, R 2 ), 0 r 1, (5.11) ξ Q γ h ξ C ξ rh r, ξ H r (Ω, N), 0 r 1, (5.12) τ Πτ C τ r h r, τ H r (Ω, M), 1 r 2, (5.13) τ Π RT τ C τ r h r, τ H r (Ω, M), 0 r 1, (5.14) div(τ Πτ) + div(τ Π RT τ) C div τ r h r, τ H r+1 (Ω, M), 0 r 1. (5.15) 15

16 Proof. Estimates (5.11) and (5.12) can be found in [11]. Estimates (5.13) (5.15) are proved in [6, 24]. We note that on general quadrilaterals, (5.11), (5.12) and (5.14) are also valid, while (5.13) and (5.15) hold only with r = 1 and r = 0, respectively. Corollary 5.1. There exists a constant C independent of h such that for all E T h, Πτ j,e C τ j,e, τ H j (E, M), j = 1, 2, (5.16) Π RT τ 1,E C τ 1,E, τ H 1 (E, M), (5.17) Q γ h ξ j,e C ξ j,e, ξ H 1 (E, N), j = 1, 2. (5.18) Proof. The proof follows from the approximation properties (5.12) (5.14) and the use of the inverse inequality, see e.g., [3, Lemma 5.1]. We remind the reader that stress tensors are mapped from the reference element via the Piola transformation, while displacements and rotations are mapped using standard change of variables, see (2.10). The following results can be found in [26], where τ P ˆτ: Also, for ξ ˆξ, using standard change of variables, ˆτ j, Ê Chj τ j,e, j 0, (5.19) (ˆτ ˆΠ RT ˆτ, ˆχ 0 ) ˆQ,Ê = 0 for all constant tensors ˆχ 0, (5.20) (AΠσ, τ Π RT τ) Q,E Ch σ 1,E τ E τ X h. (5.21) ˆξ j, Ê Chj 1 ξ j,e, ˆξ j,, Ê Chj ξ j,,e, j 0. (5.22) For τ, χ X h, ξ W 1 h, denote the element quadrature errors by θ(aτ, χ) E (Aτ, χ) E (Aτ, χ) Q,E, δ(τ, ξ) E (τ, ξ) E (τ, ξ) Q,E, and define the global quadrature errors by θ(aτ, χ) E = θ(aτ, χ) E, δ(τ, ξ) E = δ(τ, ξ) E. Similarly denote the quadrature errors on the reference element by ˆθ(, ) and ˆδ(, ). Denote A W j, T h if A W j, (E) E T h and A j,,e is uniformly bounded independently of h. Lemma 5.2. If A W 1, T h, there exists a constant C independent of h such that τ X h, χ X RT h, θ(aτ, χ) C E T h h A 1,,E τ 1,E χ E. (5.23) Moreover, there exist a constant C independent of h such that for all τ X RT h and ξ W 1 h, δ(τ, ξ) C E T h h τ 1,E ξ E, (5.24) δ(τ, ξ) C E T h h τ E ξ 1,E. (5.25) Proof. For a function ϕ defined on Ê, let ϕ be its mean value. We have θ E (Aτ, χ) = ˆθÊ(ˆτ 1 J E DF T E, ˆχDF T E ) = 1 ˆθÊ(( Â)ˆτ DF E T, ˆχDF T 1 E ) + ˆθÊ( ˆτ( DF E T 1 DF E T J E J E J ), ˆχDF E T ) E + 1 ˆθÊ( ˆτ DF E T J, ˆχ(DF E T DF T 1 E )) + ˆθÊ( ˆτ DF E T E J, ˆχDF E T ) E I k. (5.26) k=1 16

17 Using the Bramble-Hilbert lemma [11], (2.8), (5.19), and (5.22), we bound the first term on the right in (5.26) as follows: Similarly, using (2.8), (5.2), (5.19), and (5.22), I 1 C  1,,Ê ˆτ Ê ˆχ Ê Ch A 1,,E τ E χ E. (5.27) I 2 + I 3 Ch  0,,Ê ˆτ Ê ˆχ Ê Ch A 0,,E τ E χ E. (5.28) To bound I 4, recall that the trapezoidal quadrature rule is exact for bilinear functions. Since ˆχ ˆX RT (Ê) is linear, I 4 = 0 for any constant tensor ˆτ. Using the Bramble-Hilbert lemma, (2.8), (5.19), and (5.22), we have I 4 C  0,,Ê ˆτ 1,Ê ˆχ Ê Ch A 0,,E τ 1,E χ E. (5.29) Combining (5.26) (5.29) and summing over the elements implies (5.23). Similarly, using the exactness of the quadrature rule for bilinears, the Bramble-Hilbert lemma, (2.8), (5.2), (5.19), and (5.22), we have δ E (τ, ξ) = ˆδ(ˆτDF E T, ˆξ) ˆδ(ˆτ(DF E T DF E T ), ˆξ) + ˆδ(ˆτDF E T, ˆξ) ( ) C DF E 1,, Ê ˆτ Ê ˆξ Ê + DF E 0,, Ê ˆτ 1,Ê ˆξ Ê Ch τ 1,E ξ E, which implies (5.24). Bound (5.25) follows in a similar way. Lemma 5.3. There exists a constant C independent of h such that for all τ X h and ξ W 1 h, (τ Π RT τ, ξ) Q Ch τ ξ 1. (5.30) Proof. The proof follows from mapping to the reference element and using (5.20). 5.2 First order convergence for all variables The convergence analysis presented below is different from the one on simplices from [3]. In particular, since the quadrature error bounds (5.23) (5.25) require that one of the arguments is in X RT h, rather than X h, the error equations need to be manipulated in a special way. Theorem 5.1. Let A W 1, T h. For the solution (σ, u, γ) of (2.3) (2.5) and its numerical approximation (σ h, u h, γ h ) obtained by either the MSMFE-0 method (3.2) (3.4) or the MSMFE-1 method (4.1) (4.3), there exists a constant C independent of h such that σ σ h div + u u h + γ γ h Ch( σ 1 + div σ 1 + u 1 + γ 1 ). (5.31) Proof. We present the argument for the MSMFE-1 method, which includes the proof for the MSMFE-0 method. We form the error system by subtracting the MSMFE-1 method (4.1) (4.3) from (2.3) (2.5): (Aσ, τ) (Aσ h, τ) Q + (u u h, div τ) + (γ, τ) (γ h, τ) Q = g P 0 g, τn ΓD, τ X h, (5.32) Using (5.9), (5.5), and (3.1), we rewrite the first error equation as (A(Πσ σ h ), τ) Q + (Q u h u u h, div τ) (div(σ σ h ), v) = 0, v V h, (5.33) (σ, ξ) (σ h, ξ) Q = 0, ξ W 1 h. (5.34) = (Aσ, τ) + (AΠσ, τ) Q (γ, τ) + (γ h, τ) Q + g, (τ Π RT τ)n ΓD. (5.35) 17

18 For the first two terms on the right above we write (Aσ, τ) + (AΠσ, τ) Q = (Aσ, τ Π RT τ) (A(σ Πσ), Π RT τ) (AΠσ, Π RT τ) + (AΠσ, Π RT τ) Q + (AΠσ, τ Π RT τ) Q. (5.36) The second two terms on the right in (5.35) can be rewritten as (γ, τ) + (γ h, τ) Q = (γ, τ Π RT τ) (γ Q γ h γ, ΠRT τ) (Π RT τ, Q γ h γ) + (ΠRT τ, Q γ h γ) Q + (Q γ h γ, τ ΠRT τ) Q + (γ h Q γ h γ, τ) Q. (5.37) Combining the first terms in (5.36) and (5.37) with the last term in (5.35) gives (Aσ, τ Π RT τ) (γ, τ Π RT τ) + g, (τ Π RT τ)n ΓD = 0, (5.38) which follows from testing (2.3) with τ Π RT τ and using (5.6). The rest of the terms in (5.36) and (5.37) are bounded as follows. Using (5.13) and (5.7), we have (A(σ Πσ), Π RT τ) Ch σ 1 τ Ch 2 σ ɛ τ 2. (5.39) For the third and fourth terms on the right in (5.36), using (5.23), (5.16) and (5.17), we obtain Using (5.21), we write θ(aπσ, Π RT τ) Ch σ 1 τ Ch 2 σ ɛ τ 2. (5.40) (AΠσ, τ Π RT τ) Q Ch σ 1 τ Ch 2 σ ɛ τ 2. (5.41) We next bound the terms on the right in (5.37). Due to (5.12) and (5.7), we have Using (5.25), (5.7), and (5.18), we have Using Lemma 5.3, we obtain Combining (5.35) (5.44), we obtain (γ Q γ h γ, ΠRT τ) Ch γ 1 τ Ch 2 γ ɛ τ 2. (5.42) δ(π RT τ, Q γ h γ) Ch τ γ 1 Ch 2 γ ɛ τ 2. (5.43) (Q γ h γ, τ ΠRT τ) Q Ch γ 1 τ Ch 2 γ ɛ τ 2. (5.44) (A(Πσ σ h ), τ) Q +(Q u h u u h, div τ) Ch 2 ( σ γ 2 1) + ɛ τ 2 + (γ h Q γ h γ, τ) Q. (5.45) We next note that, using (5.3), the second error equation (5.33) implies that The third error equation (5.34) implies div(πσ σ h ) = 0. (5.46) (Πσ σ h, ξ) Q = (Πσ σ, ξ) Q + (σ Π RT σ, ξ) Q δ(π RT σ, ξ) + (Π RT σ σ, ξ) Ch 2 σ ɛ ξ 2, (5.47) using (5.13), (5.14), (5.24), and (5.17) for the inequality. We now set τ = Πσ σ h in (5.45), ξ = γ h Q γ h γ in (5.47), use (2.19) and (5.46), and take ɛ small enough to obtain Πσ σ h 2 Ch 2 ( σ γ 2 1) + ɛ γ h Q γ h γ 2. (5.48) 18

19 We apply the inf-sup condition (4.4) to (Q u h u u h, Q γ h γ γ h) V h W 1 h and use (5.32) to obtain Q u h u u h + Q γ γ h γ γ (Aσ, τ) + (Aσ h, τ) Q (γ, τ) + (Qh h C sup γ, τ) Q + g P 0 g, τn ΓD τ X h τ div C(h σ 1 + h γ 1 + Πσ σ h ), (5.49) where the numerator terms have been bounded in a manner similar to the bounds for the terms in the error equation (5.32) presented above. Next, we combine a sufficiently small multiple of (5.49) with (5.48), and choose ɛ in (5.48) small enough to get Πσ σ h + Q u h u u h + Q γ h γ γ h Ch( σ 1 + γ 1 ). (5.50) The assertion of the theorem follows from (5.50), (5.46), (5.11) (5.13), and (5.15). The proof for the MSMFE-0 method can obtained by omitting the quadrature error terms δ(, ). 5.3 Second order convergence for the displacement We next present superconvergence analysis for the displacement using a duality argument. We need the following improved bounds on the quadrature errors. Lemma 5.4. If A W 2, T h, there exists a constant C independent of h such that for all τ X h and χ X RT h θ(aτ, χ) C E T h h 2 τ 2,E χ 1,E. (5.51) For all χ X RT h, ξ W1 h there exists a constant C independent of h such that δ(χ, ξ) C E T h h 2 χ 1,E ξ 2,E. (5.52) Proof. The proof of (5.51) is given in [26, Lemma 4.2]. It uses the Piano kernel theorem [23, Theorem 5.2-3] and the fact that the quadrature rule is exact for bilinear functions. The proof of (5.52) is similar. We consider the auxiliary elasticity problem: find φ and ψ such that ψ = A 1 ɛ(φ), div ψ = (Q u h u u h) in Ω, φ = 0 on Γ D, ψ n = 0 on Γ N. (5.53) We assume that the above problem is H 2 -elliptic regular, see [14] for sufficient conditions: φ 2 C Q u h u u h. (5.54) Theorem 5.2. If A W 2, T h and (5.54) holds, there exists a constant C independent of h such that Q u h u u h Ch 2 ( σ 2 + γ 2 ). (5.55) Proof. We present the proof for the MSMFE-1 method and note that the proof for the MSMFE-0 method can be obtained by omitting the terms arising due to the quadrature error δ(, ). We rewrite the error equation (5.35) as (A(Πσ σ h ), τ) Q + (Q u h u u h, div τ) = (A(Πσ σ), τ) θ(aπσ, τ) (γ, τ) + (γ h, τ) Q + g P 0 g, τn ΓD. 19

20 and choose τ = Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ) to obtain Q u h u u h 2 = (A(Πσ σ h ), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q + (A(Πσ σ), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) θ(aπσ, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) (γ, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) + (γ h, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q. (5.56) For the second term on the right in (5.56), using (5.13) and (5.17), we have (A(Πσ σ), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Ch 2 σ 2 φ 2. (5.57) The third term on the right in (5.56) is bounded using (5.51), (5.16) and (5.17): θ(aπσ, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) C h 2 AΠσ 2,E Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ) 1,E Ch 2 σ 2 φ 2. (5.58) E T h The first term on the right in (5.56) can be manipulated as follows: (A(Πσ σ h ), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q,E = ((A Ā)(Πσ σ h), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q,E + (Ā(Πσ σ h), Π RT (A 1 Ā 1 )ɛ(φ)) Q,E + (Ā(Πσ σ h), Π RT Ā 1 (ɛ(φ) ɛ(φ 1 ))) Q,E + (Ā(Πσ σ h), Π RT Ā 1 ɛ(φ 1 )) Q,E I k, (5.59) where Ā is the mean value of A on E and φ 1 is a linear approximation of φ such that, see [11], φ φ 1 E Ch 2 φ 2,E, φ φ 1 1,E Ch φ 2,E. (5.60) Using (5.11), (5.60), and (5.17), we have I 1 + I 2 + I 3 Ch Πσ σ h E φ 2,E. (5.61) k=1 For the last term on the right in (5.59), we first note that for a constant tensor τ 0, ˆτ 0 = J E τ 0 DF T E ˆX RT (Ê), so using (5.4) we have Therefore Π RT τ 0 = 1 J E ˆΠRT ˆτ 0 DF T E = 1 J E ˆτ 0 DF T E = τ 0. (5.62) I 4 = (Πσ σ h, ɛ(φ 1 )) Q,E = (Πσ σ h, φ 1 ) Q,E (Πσ σ h, Skew( φ 1 )) Q,E (5.63) For the second term on the right in (5.63) we write (Πσ σ h, Skew( φ 1 )) Q,E = (Πσ σ h, Skew( φ 1 ) Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) Q,E + (Πσ σ h, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) Q,E Ch Πσ σ h E φ 2,E + (Πσ σ h, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) Q,E, (5.64) using (5.12) for the inequality. For the last term above, using the error equation (5.34), we write (Πσ σ h, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) Q,E = (Πσ, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) Q,E (Πσ, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) E + (Πσ σ, Q γ h Skew( φ 1)) E Ch 2 σ 2,E φ 2,E, (5.65) using (5.51) and (5.13) for the inequality. We next bound the first term on the right in (5.63). Using that φ 1 = ˆ ˆφ 1 DF 1, we write (Πσ σ h, φ 1 ) Q,E = (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ ˆφ 1 ) ˆQ, Ê. (5.66) 20

21 We note that ˆφ 1 is bilinear. Let φ 1 be the linear part of ˆφ 1. Then we have (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ ˆφ 1 ) ˆQ, Ê = (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ ( ˆφ 1 φ 1 )) ˆQ, Ê + (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ φ 1 ) ˆQ, Ê. (5.67) (ŷ ) It follows from (2.6) that [ ˆ ( ˆφ 1 φ 1 )] i = ((r 34 r 21 ) [ φ 1 F E ] i ), i = 1, 2. Hence, (5.1) implies ˆx (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ ( ˆφ 1 φ 1 )) ˆQ, Ê Ch2 ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h Ê φ F E Ê Ch Πσ σ h E φ 1,E, (5.68) where we used (5.19) in the last inequality. For the last term in (5.67), using (5.20) and the exactness of the quadrature rule for linear functions, we obtain (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h, ˆ φ 1 ) ˆQ, Ê = (ˆΠ RT (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h ), ˆ φ 1 ) ˆQ, Ê = (ˆΠ RT (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h ), ˆ φ 1 )Ê = (ˆΠ RT (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h ), ˆ ( φ 1 ˆφ 1 ))Ê + (ˆΠ RT (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h ), ˆ ˆφ 1 )Ê. (5.69) We bound the first term on the right in (5.69) similarly to (5.68): (ˆΠ RT (ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h ), ˆ ( φ 1 ˆφ 1 ))Ê Ch 2 ˆΠˆσ ˆσ h Ê φ F E Ê Ch Πσ σ h E φ 1,E. (5.70) Combining (5.59) (5.70) and summing over the elements, we obtain (A(Πσ σ h ), Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q C(h Πσ σ h + h 2 σ 2 ) φ 2 + (Π RT. (Πσ σ h ), φ 1 ) E (5.71) E T h For the last term above, noting that integration by parts, (5.46), (5.6), φ = 0 on Γ D, and (Πσ σ h )n = 0 on Γ N imply E T h (Π RT (Πσ σ h ), φ) E = 0, we have (Π RT (Πσ σ h ), φ 1 ) E = (Π RT (Πσ σ h ), (φ 1 φ)) E Ch Πσ σ h φ 2. (5.72) E T h E T h It is left to bound the last two terms on the right in (5.56). We rewrite them as follows: (γ, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) + (γ h, Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q = δ(π RT A 1 ɛ(φ), Q γ h γ) (γ Qγ h γ, ΠRT A 1 ɛ(φ)) + (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q. (5.73) For the first term on the right-hand side we use (5.52), (5.17), and (5.18): δ(π RT A 1 ɛ(φ), Q γ h γ) C E T h h 2 Π RT A 1 ɛ(φ) 1,E Q γ h γ 2,E Ch 2 φ 2 γ 2. (5.74) The second term on the right in (5.73) is bounded using the symmetry of A 1 ɛ(φ), (5.12) and (5.14): (γ Q γ h γ, ΠRT A 1 ɛ(φ)) = (γ Q γ h γ, ΠRT A 1 ɛ(φ) A 1 ɛ(φ)) Ch 2 γ 1 φ 2. (5.75) For the last term in (5.73) we have (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT A 1 ɛ(φ)) Q = (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT (A 1 Ā 1 )ɛ(φ)) Q + (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT Ā 1 (ɛ(φ) ɛ(φ 1 ))) Q + (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT Ā 1 ɛ(φ 1 )) Q. (5.76) We bound the first two terms on the right in (5.76) similarly to I 2 and I 3 in (5.61): (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT (A 1 Ā 1 )ɛ(φ)) Q + (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT Ā 1 (ɛ(φ) ɛ(φ 1 ))) Q Ch γ h Q γ h γ φ 2. (5.77) For the last term in (5.76), using (5.62) and the symmetry of Ā 1 ɛ(φ 1 ), we have (γ h Q γ h γ, ΠRT Ā 1 ɛ(φ 1 )) Q = (γ h Q γ h γ, Ā 1 ɛ(φ 1 )) Q = 0. (5.78) The assertion of the theorem follows from combining (5.56) (5.78) and using (5.50). 21

22 6 Numerical results In this section we present numerical results that verify the theoretical results from the previous sections. We used deal.ii finite element library [4] for the implementation of the method. We consider a homogeneous and isotropic body, 1 λ Aσ = σ tr(σ)i, 2µ 2µ + 2λ where I is the 2 2 identity matrix and µ > 0, λ > µ are the Lame coefficients. We consider Ω = (0, 1)2 and the elasticity problem (2.1) (2.2) with Dirichlet boundary conditions and exact solution [5] cos(πx) sin(2πy) u0 =. cos(πy) sin(πx) The Lame coefficients are chosen as λ = 123, µ = We study the convergence of the MSMFE-1 method on three different types of grids. For the first test, we use the sequence of square meshes generated by sequential uniform refinement of an initial mesh with characteristic size h = 1/2, see Figure 4. For the second test, an initial general quadrilateral grid is used, and a sequence of meshes is obtained by sequential splitting of each element into four. This refinement procedure produces h2 -parallelogram grids, see Figure 5, where the initial coarse grid is also shown. For the third test, we consider a sequence of smooth quadrilateral meshes. Each mesh is produced 1 to a uniformly refined square mesh, starting by applying a smooth map x = x sin(2πx ) sin(2π y ) 1 with h = 1/2, see Figure 6. We note that the grids in the first and third tests satisfy both the stability condition (M2) and the h2 -parallelogram condition (5.1). The grids in the second test satisfy (5.1), but may violate (M2) along the edges of the initial coarse grid. However, we further note that (M2) is not needed on parallelograms and the elements here are h2 -parallelograms. The computed solutions for tests 1-3 are shown in Figures 4 6, respectively. The solutions are similar despite the different types of grids. The highly distorted elements in the third test do not affect the quality of the solution. The convergence results are presented in Tables 1 3. We observe at least first order of convergence for all variables, as predicted in (5.31), as well as superconvergence of the displacement error evaluated at the cell centers (5.55). (a) x-stress (b) y-stress (c) Displacement (d) Rotation Figure 4: Computed solution on a square mesh, h = 1/64. References [1] I. Aavatsmark. An introduction to multipoint flux approximations for quadrilateral grids. Comput. Geosci., 6(3-4): , Locally conservative numerical methods for flow in porous media. 22

23 (a) x-stress (b) y-stress (c) Displacement (d) Rotation Figure 5: Computed solution on a h2 -parallelogram mesh, h = 1/32. (a) x-stress (b) y-stress (c) Displacement (d) Rotation Figure 6: Computed solution on a smooth quadrilateral mesh, h = 1/64. h 1/2 1/4 1/8 1/16 1/32 1/64 kσ σh k error rate 7.61E E E E E E k div(σ σh )k error rate 9.73E E E E E E ku uh k error rate 7.19E E E E E E kquh u uh k error rate 4.76E E E E E E kγ γh k error rate 8.17E E E E E Table 1: Convergence on square grids. h 1/3 1/6 1/12 1/24 1/48 1/96 kσ σh k error rate 5.92E E E E E E k div(σ σh )k error rate 8.00E E E E E E ku uh k error rate 5.35E E E E E E kquh u uh k error rate 1.63E E E E E E kγ γh k error rate 5.98E E E E E E Table 2: Convergence on h2 -parallelogram grids. [2] I. Aavatsmark, T. Barkve, O. Bøe, and T. Mannseth. Discretization on unstructured grids for inhomogeneous, anisotropic media. II. Discussion and numerical results. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 19(5): ,