A FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS ON SURFACES
|
|
- Logan Aron Simmons
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 A FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS ON SURFACES MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII, ARNOLD REUSKEN, AND JÖRG GRANDE Abstract. In this paper a new finite element approach for the discretization of elliptic partial differential equations on surfaces is treated. The main idea is to use finite element spaces that are induced by triangulations of an outer domain to discretize the partial differential equation on the surface. The method is particularly suitable for problems in which there is a coupling with a flow problem in an outer domain that contains the surface. We give an analysis that shows that the method has optimal order of convergence both in the H 1 and in the L 2 -norm. Results of numerical experiments are included that confirm this optimality. Key words. Surface, interface, finite element, level set method, two-phase flow, Marangoni AMS subject classifications. 58J32, 65N15, 65N30, 76D45, 76T99 1. Introduction. Moving hypersurfaces and interfaces appear in many physical processes, for example in multiphase flows and flows with free surfaces. Certain mathematical models involve elliptic partial differential equations posed on such surfaces. This happens, for example, in multiphase fluids if one takes so-called surface active agents (surfactants into account. These surfactants induce tangential surface tension forces and thus cause Marangoni phenomena [9, 10]. Numerical simulations play an important role for a better understanding and prediction of processes involving this or other surface phenomena. In mathematical models surface equations are often coupled with other equations that are formulated in a (fixed domain which contains the surface. In such a setting a common approach is to use a splitting scheme that allows to solve at each time step a sequence of simpler (decoupled equations. Doing so one has to solve numerically at each time step an elliptic type of equation on a surface. The surface may vary from one time step to another and usually only some discrete approximation of the surface is available. A well-known finite element method for solving elliptic equations on surfaces, initiated by the paper [5], consists of approximating the surface by a piecewise polygonal surface and using a finite element space on a triangulation of this discrete surface, cf. [3, 9]. If the surface is changing in time, then this approach leads to time-dependent triangulations and time-dependent finite element spaces. Implementing this requires substantial data handling and programming effort. Another approach has recently been introduced in [2]. The method in that paper applies to cases in which the surface is given implicitly by some level set function and the key idea is to solve the partial differential equation on a narrow band around the surface. Unfitted finite element spaces on this narrow band are used for discretization. In this paper we introduce a new technique for the numerical solution of an elliptic equation posed on a hypersurface. The main idea is to use time-independent finite element spaces that are induced by triangulations of an outer domain to discretize the partial differential equation on the surface. Our method is particularly Department of Mechanics and Mathematics, Moscow State M.V. Lomonosov University, Moscow , Russia; Maxim.Olshanskii@mtu-net.ru. This author was partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research through projects and Institut für Geometrie und Praktische Mathematik, RWTH-Aachen University, D Aachen, Germany; reusken@igpm.rwth-aachen.de This work was supported by the German Research Foundation through SFB
2 suitable for problems in which the surface is given implicitly by a level set or VOF function and in which there is a coupling with a flow problem in a fixed outer domain. If in such problems one uses finite element techniques for the discetization of the flow equations in the outer domain, this setting immediately results in an easy to implement discretization method for the surface equation. The new approach does not require additional surface elements. If the surface varies in time, one has to recompute the surface stiffness matrix using the same data structures each time. Moreover, quadrature routines that are needed for these computations are often available already, since they are needed in other surface related calculations, for example surface tension forces. Opposite to the method in [2] we do not use an extension of the surface partial differential equation but instead use a restriction of the outer finite element spaces. We prove that the method has optimal order of convergence in H 1 and L 2 norms. The analysis requires shape regularity of the outer triangulation, but does not require any type of shape regularity for discrete surface elements. The number of unknowns in the resulting algebraic systems is almost the same as in the approach based on the surface finite element spaces. All these properties make the new method very attractive both from the theoretical and the practical (implementation point of view. Although our primal objective is to solve efficiently equations on moving and implicitly defined surfaces, the method is also well suited for problems with steady and/or explicitly given surfaces. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we present the finite element method for the model example of the Laplace-Beltrami equation. Section 3 contains the main theoretical results of the paper concerning the approximation properties of the finite element spaces and discretization error bounds for the new method. Finally, in section 4 results of numerical experiments are given, which support the theoretical analysis of the paper. 2. Laplace-Beltrami equation and finite element discretization. In applications, the finite element method that is presented in this section is particularly suited for discretization of elliptic equations on a moving manifold = (t. In this paper, however, we restrict ourselves to the case of a fixed sufficiently smooth manifold (= (t n without boundary. As a model problem for an elliptic equation we consider the pure diffusion (i.e., Laplace-Beltrami equation. We assume that Ω is an open subset in R 3 and a connected C 2 compact hypersurface contained in Ω. For a sufficiently smooth function g : Ω R the tangential derivative (along is defined by g = g g n n. (2.1 By we denote the Laplace-Beltrami operator on. We consider the Laplace- Beltrami problem in weak form: For given f L 2 ( with fds = 0, determine u H 1 ( with u ds = 0 such that u v ds = fv ds for all v H 1 (. (2.2 The solution u is unique and satisfies u H 2 ( with u H2 ( c f L2 ( and a constant c independent of f, cf. [5]. For the discretization of this problem one needs an approximation h of. We assume that this approximate manifold is constructed as follows. Let {T h } h>0 be a family of tetrahedral triangulations of a fixed domain Ω R 3 that contains. These 2
3 triangulations are assumed to be regular, consistent and stable [1]. Take T h {T h } h>0 and denote the set of tetrahedra that form T h by {S}. We assume that h is a C 0,1 surface without a boundary and h can be partitioned in planar segments, triangles or quadrilaterals, consistent with the outer triangulation T h. This can be formally defined as follows. For any tetrahedron S T T h such that meas 2 (S T h > 0 define T = S T h. We assume that each T is planar, i.e., either a triangle or a quadrilateral. Thus h can be decomposed as h = T Fh T, (2.3 where F h is the set of all triangles or quadrilaterals T such that T = S T h for some tetrahedron S T T h. Note that if T coincides with a face of an element in T h than the corresponding S T is not unique. In this case, we chose one arbitrary but fixed tetrahedron S T which has T as a face. Remark 1. We briefly explain an approach for the construction of an approximation h of that is used in our applications in two-phase flow problems, cf. [6, 8, 7]. The interface is represented as the zero level of a (unknown level set function φ. The level set equation for φ is discretized with continuous piecewise quadratic finite elements on the tetrahedral triangulation T h. The use of piecewise quadratics (instead of piecewise linears allows an accurate discretization of the surface tension force (which depends on the curvature of. The (given piecewise quadratic finite element approximation of φ on T h is denoted by φ h. We now introduce one further regular refinement of T h, resulting in T h = T. Let I(φ h h be the continuous piecewise 2 linear function on T h which interpolates φ h at all vertices of all tetrahedra in T h. The approximation of the interface is defined by h := {x Ω I(φ h (x = 0 }. (2.4 and consists of piecewise planar segments. The mesh size parameter h is the maximal diameter of these segments. This maximal diameter is approximately the maximal diameter of the tetrahedra in T h that contain the discrete interface, i.e., h = h is approximately the maximal diameter of the tetrahedra in T h that are close to the interface. In Figure 2.1 we illustrate this construction for the two-dimensional case. h T h T h Fig Construction of approximate interface for 2D case. Each of the planar segments of h is either a triangle or a quadrilateral. This construction of h satisfies the assumptions made above. It can be shown that under reasonable assumption, as explained in remark 7 below, the approximation h is close to in the following sense (cf. (3.14, (3.15 : dist( h, c 0 h 2, and ess sup x h n(x n h (x c 0 h, where n is the extension of n in a neighborhood of and n h a unit normal on h. In Fig. 2.2 we show a part of h that is constructed as explained above for a two-phase flow application with a rising droplet. 3
4 Fig Example of a part of h in a two-phase flow application. The main new idea of this paper is that for discretization of the problem (2.2 we use a finite element space induced by the continuous linear finite elements on T h. This is done as follows. We define a subdomain that contains h : We introduce the finite element space ω h := T Fh S T. (2.5 V h := { v h C(ω h v ST P 1 for all T F h }. (2.6 where P 1 is the space of polynomials of degree one. The space V h induces the following space on h : V h := {ψ h H 1 ( h v h V h : ψ h = v h h }. (2.7 This space is used for a Galerkin discretization of (2.2: determine u h Vh with h u h ds h = 0 such that h u h h ψ h ds h = h f h ψ h ds h h for all ψ h Vh, (2.8 with f h an extension of f such that h f h ds h = 0, cf. section 3.3. Due the Lax- Milgram lemma this problem has a unique solution u h. In section 3 we present a discretization error analysis of this method that shows that under reasonable assumptions we have optimal error bounds. In section 4 we show results of numerical experiments that confirm the theoretical analysis. As far as we know this method for discretization of a partial differential equation on a surface is new. In the remarks below we give some comments related to this approach. Remark 2. The family {T h } h>0 is shape-regular but the family {F h } h>0 in general is not shape-regular. In our numerical experiments, cf. section 4, F h contains a significant number of strongly deteriorated triangles that have very small angles. Moreover, neighboring triangles can have very different areas, cf. Fig As we will prove in section 3, optimal discretization bounds hold if {T h } h>0 is shape-regular; for {F h } h>0 shape-regularity is not required. 4
5 Remark 3. Let (ξ i 1 i m be the collection of all vertices of all tetrahedra in ω h and φ i the nodal linear finite element basis function corresponding to ξ i. Then Vh is spanned by the functions φ i h, 1 i m. These functions, however, are not necessarily independent. In computations we use this generating system φ i h, 1 i m, for solving the discrete problem (2.8. Properties that are of interest for the numerical solution of the resulting linear system, such as conditioning of the mass and stiffness matrix are analyzed in the forthcoming paper [11]. Remark 4. In the implementation of this method one has to compute integrals of the form h φ j h φ i ds, f h φ i ds for T F h. T T The domain T is either a triangle or a quadrilateral. The first integral can be computed exactly. For the second one standard quadrature rules can be applied. Remark 5. Each quadrilateral in F h can be subdivided into two triangles. Let F h be the induced set consisting of only triangles and such that T Fh T = h. Define Wh := { ψ h C( h ψ h T P 1 for all T F h }. (2.9 The space Wh is the space of continuous functions that are piecewise linear on the triangles of h. Clearly Vh W h holds. There are, however, situations in which Vh W h. A 2D illustration of this is given in Fig Fig Example In this example ω h consists of 10 triangles (shaded. The nodal basis functions correponding to these basis functions are denoted by {φ i } 1 i 10. The line segments of the interface h (denoted by - - intersect midpoints of edges of the triangles. The space Wh consists of piecewise linears on h and is spanned by the 1D nodal basis functions at the intersection points labeled by boldface 1,...,10. Clearly dim(wh = 10. In this example we have dim(vh = 9. For the piecewise linear function v = 10 i=1 α iφ i with α i = 1 for i = 1, 2, 3 and α i = 1 for i = 4,...,10 we have v h = 0. The example in remark 5 shows that the finite element space Vh can be smaller then Wh, and therefore approximation properties of V h do not follow directly from those of Wh. Moreover, the triangulations { F h } h>0 of h are not shape regular, cf. remark 2 and Fig Thus it is not clear how (optimal approximation error bounds for the standard linear finite element space Wh in (2.9 can be derived. 5
6 3. Discretization error analysis. In this section we derive discretization error bounds, both in the H 1 - and the L 2 -norm on h. We first collect some preliminaries in section 3.1, then derive approximation error bounds in section 3.2 and finally present discretization error bounds in section Preliminaries. We will need a Poincare type inequality that is given in the following lemma. Lemma 3.1. Consider a bounded domain Ω R n and a subdomain S Ω. Assume that Ω is such that the Neumann-Poincare inequality is valid: f L2 (Ω C P f L2 (Ω for all f H 1 (Ω with Then for any f H 1 (Ω the following estimate holds: Ω f dx = 0. (3.1 f 2 L 2 (Ω Ω ( 2 f 2 L S 2 (S + 3C2 P f 2 L 2 (Ω. (3.2 Proof. The proof uses a technique developed by Sobolev ([13], Ch.I for building equivalent norms on W l q(ω (Sobolev spaces. We consider the simple case with q = 2, l = 1, i.e. H 1 (Ω. Introduce the projectors Π k : H 1 (Ω R, k = 1, 2: Π 1 f := Ω 1 Ω f dx, Π 2 f := S 1 S f dx. Since (I Π 1 f 2 L 2 (Ω = f 2 L 2 (Ω Ω Π 1f 2, the Neumann-Poincare inequality (3.1 can be rewritten in the equivalent form: f 2 L 2 (Ω Ω Π 1f 2 + C 2 P f 2 L 2 (Ω for all f H 1 (Ω. (3.3 For any f H 1 (Ω with Π 1 f = 0 the Cauchy and Neumann-Poincare inequality implies Π 2 f = S 1 S f dx S 1 2 f L2 (S S 1 2 f L 2 (Ω C p S 1 2 f L 2 (Ω. (3.4 Define M := C P S 1 2. Note that for f H 1 (Ω we have Π 1 (I Π 1 f = 0 and thus from (3.4 we obtain: (Π 2 Π 1 f = Π 2 (I Π 1 f M (I Π 1 f L2 (Ω = M f L2 (Ω. Hence, for any f H 1 (Ω we have Π 1 f 2 + M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω 2 Π 2f (Π 2 Π 1 f 2 + M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω 2 Π 2 f 2 + 3M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω. (3.5 6
7 Estimates (3.3 and (3.5 imply: ( f 2 L 2 (Ω max{ Ω, C2 PM 2 } Π 1 f 2 + M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω ( = Ω Π 1 f 2 + M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω ( Ω 2 Π 2 f 2 + 3M 2 f 2 L 2 (Ω ( Ω 2 S 1 f 2 L 2 (S + 3M2 f 2 L 2 ( (Ω = Ω S 1 2 f 2 L 2 (S + 3C2 P f 2 L 2 (Ω, which proves the inequality in (3.2. Remark 6. In the analysis below we shall apply lemma 3.1 for the case of convex domain Ω. For convex domains the following upper bound is well-known [12] for the Poincare constant: C P diam(ω. (3.6 π We define a neighborhood of : U = {x R 3 dist(x, < c }, with c sufficiently small and assume that h U. Let d : U R be the signed distance function, d(x := dist(x, for all x U. Thus is the zero level set of d. We assume d < 0 on the interior of and d > 0 on the exterior. Note that n = d on. We define n(x := d(x for all x U. Thus n = n on and n(x = 1 for all x U. Here and in the remainder denotes the Euclidean norm. The Hessian of d is denoted by H: H(x = D 2 d(x R 3 3 for all x U. (3.7 The eigenvalues of H(x are denoted by κ 1 (x, κ 2 (x and 0. For x the eigenvalues κ i (x, i = 1, 2, are the principal curvatures. We will need the orthogonal projection P(x = I n(xn(x T for x U. Note that the tangential derivative can be written as g(x = P g(x for x. We introduce a locally orthogonal coordinate system by using the projection p : U : p(x = x d(xn(x for all x U. We assume that the decomposition x = p(x+d(xn(x is unique for all x U. Note that n(x = n(p(x for all x U. We use an extension operator defined as follows. For a function v on we define v e (x := v(x d(xn(x = v(p(x for all x U, 7
8 i.e., v is extended along normals on. We define a discrete analogon of the orthogonal projection P: P h (x := I n h (xn h (x T for x h, x not on an edge. Here n h (x denotes the (outward pointing normal at x h (x not on an edge. The tangential derivative along h can be written as h g(x = P h (x g(x for x h (not on an edge. In the analysis we use techniques from [3, 5]. For example, the formula u e (x = (I d(xh(x u(p(x a.e. on U (3.8 (cf. section 2.3 in [3], which implies, h v e (x = P h (x ( I d(xh(x v(p(x a.e. on h. (3.9 Furthermore, for u sufficiently smooth and µ = 2, the inequality D µ u e (x c( D µ u(p(x + u(p(x a.e. on U (3.10 µ =2 holds, cf. lemma 3 in [5]. We define an h-neighborhood of : U h = {x R 3 dist(x, < c 1 h } and assume that h is sufficiently small, such that ω h U h U and 5c 1 h < ( max κ 1. i L ( (3.11 i=1,2 From (2.5 in [3] we have the following formula for the principal curvatures κ i : κ i (x = Hence, from (3.11 and (3.12 it follows that κ i (p(x, for x U. ( d(xκ i (p(x d L (U h max i=1,2 κ i L (U h 1 4 (3.13 holds. In the remainder we assume that ess sup x h d(x c 0 h 2, (3.14 ess sup x h n(x n h (x c 0 h, (3.15 holds. Remark 7. Related to these assumptions we note the following. Consider an approach as outlined in remark 1 in which the approximation h of is constructed using a level set method and a piecewise quadratic finite approximation φ h of the level set function φ. We assume that the level set function φ equals the signed distance function d, i.e., φ = d and that for the finite element approximation an error bound φ h φ L (ω h + h φ h φ H 1, (ω h ch 3 k φ H 3 k, (ω h, k = 0, 1, 2, (3.16 8
9 holds (which is reasonable for the case of piecewise quadratics and if φ is sufficiently smooth. Let I be the nodal interpolation operator on the vertices of the triangulation ω h. Using standard properties of this operator and the error bound in (3.16 one obtains Iφ h φ L (ω h I(φ h φ L (ω h + Iφ φ L (ω h φ h φ L (ω h + ch 2 φ H 2, (ω h c h 2 φ H 2, (ω h, and thus for x h we have d(x = I(φ h (x φ(x c h 2, hence (3.14 is satisfied. We also have Iφ h φ H 1, (ω h I(φ h φ H 1, (ω h + Iφ φ H 1, (ω h c φ h φ H 1, (ω h + ch φ H 2, (ω h ch φ H 2, (ω h. Using this and φ = 1 we then have I(φ h (x = 1 + O(h for x h. For x h (not on an edge we obtain n h (x n(x = I(φ h(x I(φ h (x φ(x 1 I(φ h (x 1 I(φ h (x + I(φ h (x φ(x c h, and thus (3.15 is satisfied (for h sufficiently small. Lemma 3.2. There are constants c 1 > 0 and c 2 independent of h such that for all u H 2 ( the following inequalities hold: c 1 u e L 2 (U h h u L 2 ( c 2 u e L 2 (U h, (3.17 c 1 u e L2 (U h h u L2 ( c 2 u e L2 (U h, (3.18 D µ u e L 2 (U h c 2 h u H 2 (, µ = 2. (3.19 Proof. Note that u H 2 ( is continuous and thus u e is well-defined. Define From (2.20, (2.23 in [3] we have µ(x := ( 1 d(xκ 1 (x ( 1 d(xκ 2 (x, x U h. µ(xdx = drds(p(x, x U, where dx is the measure in U h, ds the surface measure on and r the local coordinate at x in the direction n(p(x = n(x. Using (3.13 we get 9 25 µ(x for all x U h. (3.20 Using the local coordinate representation x = (p(x, r, for x U, we have c1h u e (x 2 µ(xdx = [u e (p(x, r] 2 ds(p(xdr U h c 1h c1h = [u(p(x, 0] 2 ds(p(x = 2c 1 h u 2 L 2 (. c 1h 9
10 Combining this with (3.20 yields the result in (3.17. From (3.8 we have that u e H 1 (U h. Note that U h [ u e (x] 2 µ(xdx = c1h c 1h [ (I d(xh(x u(p(x ] 2 ds(p(xdr. Using this in combination with d(xh(x 1 4 for all x U h (cf. (3.13 and the bounds in (3.20 we obtain the result in (3.18. Finally, using similar arguments and the bound in (3.10 one can derive the bound in ( Approximation error bounds. Let I h : C(ω h V h be the nodal interpolation operator. We use the approximation property of the linear finite element space V h : For v H 2 (ω h v I h v H k (ω h C h 2 k v H 2 (ω h, k = 0, 1. (3.21 A consequence of this approximation result is given in the following lemma. Lemma 3.3. For u H 2 ( and k = 0, 1 we have u e I h u e Hk (ω h C h 5 2 k u H2 (. (3.22 Proof. From (3.21 and (3.18 we obtain u e I h u e H k (ω h C h 2 k u e H 2 (ω h C h 2 k u e H 2 (U h C h 5 2 k u H 2 (, which proves the result. The following two lemmas play a crucial role in the analysis. In both lemmas we use a pull back strategy based on lemma 3.1. For this we introduce a special local coordinate system as follows. For a subdomain ω R n let ρ(ω be the diameter of the largest ball that is contained in ω. Take an arbitrary planar segment T of h, i.e., T F h. Let S T T h be the tetrahedron such that h S T = T. There exists a planar extension T e of T such that T e U, T e is convex, p(s T p(t e and diam(t e ρ(t e h, (3.23 cf. remark 8. This extension T e is used to define a coordinate system in the neighborhood N T := {x U p(x p(t e }. Note that S T N T. Every x N T has a unique decomposition of the form x = s + d(xn(x, with s T e, d(x := ± s x. (3.24 On which side of the plane T e the point x lies determines the sign of d(x. Note that d is a signed distance, along the normal n(x, to the planar segment T e. The representation in this coordinate system is denoted by Φ, i.e., Φ(x = (s(x, d(x. This coordinate system is illustrated, for the 2D case, in Fig For x T e we thus have Φ(x = (s(x, 0. Due to the shape-regularity of T h there exists, in the Φ-coordinate system, a cylinder B T that has the following properties: B T = T e b [d 0, d 1 ] S T, T e b T e, T e b h2, d 1 d 0 h. (3.25 This coordinate system and the cylinder B T S T are used in the analysis below. 10
11 x = (s, d(x d PQ : p(s T Q AB : T e P S T T s B A Fig D Illustration of coordinate system Remark 8. The following shows that an extension T e of T with the properties described above exists. Take a fixed x 0 T. Let W be the tangent plane at p(x 0. The normal vector of W is n(x 0. There is a subdomain w of this plane such that p(w = p(s T. Due to shape regularity of T h this subdomain is such that diam(w ρ(w h holds. Let w x0 be a planar subdomain that is parallel to w, contains x 0 and such that p(w = p(w x0. Using assumption (3.14 it follows that diam(w x0 ρ(w x0 h holds. The point x 0 belongs to the planar subdomains w x0 and T, which have normals n(x 0 and n h (x 0, respectively. Due to assumption (3.15 the angle between these normals is bounded by ch and thus there exists a planar extension T e of T such that T e U and p( T e = p(w x0, now we set T e to be a minimal convex envelope for T e. This T e has the property (3.23. Lemma 3.4. Let v h be a linear function on N T and u H 2 (. There exists a constant c independent of v h, u and T such that the following inequality holds: h (u e v h L 2 (T e ch 1 2 (u e v h L 2 (S T + h u H 2 (p(t e. (3.26 Here h denotes the projection of the gradient on T e. Proof. Using lemma 3.1, (3.6 and (3.10 we obtain h (u e v h 2 L 2 (T e c h (u e v h 2 L 2 (T e b + ch2 2 h u e 2 L 2 (T e c h (u e v h 2 L 2 (T e b + ch2 u 2 H 2 (p(t e. (3.27 We consider the first term in (3.27. We write v h =: c T and use the notation x = (s(x, d(x =: (s, y in the Φ-coordinate system. From (3.8 we have u(p(x = u e (s, y + d(xh(x u(p(x. 11
12 Using this and (3.9 we obtain h (u e v h 2 L 2 (T e b = h u e P h c T 2 L 2 (T e b 2 P h ( u p P h c T 2 L 2 (T e b + 2 P hdh( u p 2 L 2 (T e b c ( u p c T 2 L 2 (Tb e + ch2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T = c u(p(s, 0 c T 2 ds + ch 2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T T e b d1 ch 1 d 0 d1 ch 1 d 0 T e b T e b u(p(s, 0 c T 2 dsdy + ch 2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T u e (p(s, y c T 2 dsdy + ch 2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T ch 1 (u e v h 2 L 2 (B T + ch2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T ch 1 (u e v h 2 L 2 (S T + ch2 u 2 H 1 (p(s T. Combination of this result with the one in (3.27 completes the proof. Lemma 3.5. There are constants c i independent of h such that for all u H 2 ( and all v h V h the following inequality holds: u e v h L 2 ( h c 1 h 1 2 u e v h L 2 (ω h +c 2 h 1 2 u e v h H 1 (ω h +c 3 h 2 u H 2 (. (3.28 Proof. We consider an arbitrary element T h. Let T e be its extension as defined above. Take v h V h. The extension of v h to a linear function on T e is denoted by v h, too. Using lemma 3.1 and (3.6 we get: u e v h 2 L 2 (T ue v h 2 L 2 (T e T = (u e (s, 0 v h (s, 0 2 ds e c (u e (s, 0 v h (s, 0 2 ds T e b ( ch 2 T e h ( u e (s, 0 v h (s, 0 2 ds. We consider the first term on the right handside of (3.29. For a linear function g and 0 δ 0 < δ 1 we have g(δ i 2 6 δ1 δ 1 δ 0 δ 0 g(t 2 dt for i = 0, 1 and g(0 = δ g(δ 0 1 δ δ 1 δ 0 g(δ 1 0 δ 1 δ 0. Hence, g(0 2δ1 δ 1 δ 0 max i=0,1 g(δ i and thus g( ( δ1 δ 1 δ δ 1 δ 0 δ1 δ 0 g(t 2 dt (3.30 holds. Without loss of generality we can assume that d 0, d 1 from (3.25 satisfy 0 d d 0 < d 1. Furthermore, we have i d 1 d 0 c for i = 1, 2, with c independent of h. Using this and the result in (3.30 applied to the linear function y c + v h (s, y we obtain d1 (u e (s, 0 v h (s, 0 2 ds ch 1 (u e (s, 0 v h (s, y 2 dyds Tb e Tb e d 0 d1 = ch 1 (u e (s, y v h (s, y 2 dy ds = ch 1 u e v h 2 (3.31 L 2 (B T d 0 T e b ch 1 u e v h 2 L 2 (S T. 12
13 For the second term on right handside of (3.29 we can apply lemma 3.4 and thus we get u e v h 2 L 2 (T ch 1 u e v h 2 L 2 (S T + ch (ue v h 2 L 2 (S T + ch4 u 2 H 2 (p(t e. Summation over all triangles in F h gives (3.28. Lemma 3.6. There are constants c 1, c 2 independent of h such that for all u H 2 ( and all v h V h the following inequality holds: u e v h H 1 ( h c 1 h 1 2 u e v h H 1 (ω h + c 2 h u H 2 (. (3.32 Proof. Take u H 2 ( and v h V h. By definition of the H 1 -norm on h we get u e v h 2 H 1 ( h = ue v h 2 L 2 ( h + h (u e v h 2 L 2 ( h. For the first term on the right handside we can apply lemma 3.5 and use h 1 2 u e v h L2 (ω h + c 2 h 1 2 u e v h H1 (ω h ch 1 2 u e v h H1 (ω h. We now consider the second term h ( u e v h 2 L 2 ( h = T F h h ( u e v h 2 L 2 (T. Take a T F h and extend v h linearly outside T. This extension is denoted by v h, too. Using lemma 3.4 we get h ( u e v h 2 L 2 (T h ( u e v h 2 L 2 (T e Summation over T F h yields ch 1 (u e v h 2 L 2 (S T + h2 u 2 H 2 (p(t e. h (u e v h 2 L 2 ( h c h 1 u e v h 2 H 1 (ω h + ch2 u 2 H 2 ( and thus the proof is completed. As a direct consequence of the previous two lemmas we obtain the following main theorem. Theorem 3.7. For each u H 2 ( the following holds inf u e v h L 2 ( h u e (I h u e h L 2 ( h C h 2 u H 2 (, (3.33 v h Vh inf v h Vh u e v h H1 ( h u e (I h u e h H1 ( h C h u H2 (, (3.34 with a constant C independent of u and h. Proof. Combine the results in the lemmas 3.5 and 3.6 with the result in lemma
14 3.3. Finite element error bounds.. In this section we prove optimal discretization error bounds both in the H 1 ( h and the L 2 ( h norm. The arguments are very close to those in [5]. A difference is that in [5] the convergence results are derived in the H 1 ( and the L 2 ( norms by lifting the discrete solutions from h on, whereas we consider the error between the finite element solution u h V h and the extension u e of the continuous solution to the discrete interface. This difference is of minor importance since error bounds in H 1 ( h imply similar bounds in H 1 (, cf. remark 9. In the analysis we need a few results from [3]. For x h define P h (x = I n h (xn(x T /(n h (x T n(x. In (2.19 in [3] the following representation of the surface gradient of u H 1 ( in terms of h u e is given: u(p(x = ( I d(xh(x 1 Ph (x h u e (x a.e. on h. (3.35 For x h define µ h (x = (1 d(xκ 1 (x(1 d(xκ 1 (xn(x T n h (x. The integral transformation formula µ h (xds h (x = ds(p(x, x h, (3.36 holds, where ds h (x and ds(p(x are the surface measures on h and, respectively (cf. (2.20 in [3]. From n(x n h (x 2 = 2 ( 1 n(x T n h (x, assumption (3.15 and d(x ch 2, κ i (x c we obtain with a constant c independent of h. ess sup x h 1 µ h (x ch 2, (3.37 Theorem 3.8. Let u H 2 ( be the solution of (2.2 and u h Vh the solution of (2.8 with f h = f e c f, where c f is such that h f h ds = 0. The following discretization error bound holds h (u e u h L 2 ( h c h f L 2 ( (3.38 with a constant c independent of f and h. Proof. Using (3.37 we obtain 1 1 µ h (x ch2 on h. Define c f := f e ds h, δ f := (1 µ h f e c f. h Note that f h = f e c f and due to f ds = 0 we get c f = f e ds h = f( 1 1ds ch 2 f h µ L 2 (. h Furthermore, δ f L 2 ( h ess sup 1 µ h (x f e L 2 ( h + h 1 2 cf ch 2 f L 2 (. (3.39 x h 14
15 Using relation (3.35 and (3.36 we obtain u v ds = A h h u e h v e ds h for all v H 1 (, (3.40 h with A h (x = µ h (x P h (x(i d(xh(x 2 Ph (x. Any ψ h H 1 ( h can be lifted on by defining ψ l h (p(x := ψ h(x. Then ψ l h H1 ( holds. From the definition of the discrete solution u h in (2.8 we get, for arbitrary ψ h V h : h u h h ψ h ds h = f h ψ h ds h = (f c f µ h (x 1 ψh l ds h h = fψh l ds + δ f ψ h ds h h = u ψh l ds + δ f ψ h ds h h = A h h u e h ψ h ds h + δ f ψ h ds h. h h Using this we obtain, for arbitrary ψ h V h, h (u e u h h ψ h ds h = (I A h h u e h ψ h ds h δ f ψ h ds h h h h = P h (I A h h u e h ψ h ds h δ f ψ h ds h. h h Therefore we get (3.41 h (u e u h 2 L 2 ( h = h (u e u h h (u e ψ h ds h h + P h (I A h h u e h (ψ h u h ds h h δ f (ψ h u h ds h. h (3.42 From P h A h ch 2 a.e. on h and P h Ph = P h we obtain, for x h, P h (x(i A h (x = P h (x( P h (x A h (x ch 2. (3.43 Furthermore, using (3.9 we get h u e L 2 ( h ess sup x h P h (x(i dh(x u L 2 ( c f L 2 (. (3.44 Introduce the notation E h := h (u e u h L 2 ( h. Note that by taking ψ h = (I h u e h and using the approximation result (3.34 we have h (u h ψ h L 2 ( h E h + h (u e ψ h L 2 ( h E h + ch f L 2 (. 15
16 For the third term on the right handside in (3.42 we have the bound δ f (ψ h u h ds h δ f L 2 ( h ψ h u h L 2 ( h h ch 2 f L2 (( ψh u e L2 ( h + u e u h L2 ( h ch 2 f L 2 (( ch 2 f L 2 ( + u e u h L 2 ( h. Note that u e u h L 2 ( h u e L 2 ( h + u h L 2 ( h c ( u L 2 ( + h u h L 2 ( h c ( u L 2 ( + h u h L 2 ( h c f L 2 (. Combination of these results leads to Eh 2 E h ch f L 2 ( + ch 2 f L (( 2 Eh + ch f L 2 ( + f L 2 ( 1 2 E2 h + ch2 f 2 L 2 (. This yields the bound in (3.38. Remark 9. We indicate how the error bound (3.38 in H 1 ( h yields a similar bound in H 1 (. For this we need the extension of functions defined on h along the normals n on : for v C( h we define, for x h, v e,h (x + αn(x := v(x for all α R with x + αn(x U. The following holds (cf. [3], Lemma 3.3 in [8]: v e,h L 2 ( c h v L 2 ( h for all v H 1 ( h C( h. Using this for the error v = u e u h and noting that (u e e,h = u on the bound (3.38 yields (u u e,h h L 2 ( ch f L 2 (, i.e., an optimal error bound in H 1 (. We now apply a duality argument to obtain an L 2 ( h -error bound. Theorem 3.9. Let u and u h be as in theorem 3.8. The following error bound holds u e u h L 2 ( h c h 2 f L 2 ( (3.45 with a constant c independent of f and h. Proof. Denote e h := (u e u h h and let e l h be the lift of e h on and c e := el h ds. Consider the problem: Find w H 1 ( with w ds = 0 such that w v dσ = (e l h c e v ds for all v H 1 (. (3.46 The solution w satisfies w H 2 ( and w H 2 ( c e l h L 2 (/R with e l h L 2 (/R := e l h c e L 2 (. Furthermore, h w e L 2 ( h c e l h L 2 (/R and w e L 2 ( h 16
17 c w L 2 ( c w L 2 ( c e l h L 2 (/R. Due to (3.46 and (3.41 we have, for any ψ h Vh, e l h 2 L 2 (/R = w (e l h c eds = w e l h ds = A h h e h h w e ds h h = h e h h (w e ψ h ds h + P h (A h I h e h h w e ds h h h + P h (I A h h u e h ψ h ds h δ f ψ h ds h. h h Introduce E h := e l h L 2 (/R. Thanks to the approximation property (3.34 one can choose ψ h such that h (w e ψ h L 2 ( h ch w H 2 ( che h. Using Cauchy- Schwarz and triangle inequalities and the bounds in (3.39, (3.43 we get Eh 2 h e h L 2 ( h che h + ch 2 h e h L 2 ( h h w e L 2 ( h + ch 2 h u e L 2 ( h ( h w e L 2 ( h + che h + ch 2 ( f L 2 ( w e L 2 ( h + che h ch 2 f L2 (E h + ch 2 f L2 (( Eh + che h. Hence, E h ch 2 f L 2 ( holds. We have and thus c e = u u e h ds = u e h ds = (µ h 1u e h ds h ch 2 f L 2 (, h e h L 2 ( h c µ 1 2 h e h 2 L 2 ( h = c el h L 2 ( c(e h + c e ch 2 f L 2 (, which completes the proof. 4. Numerical experiments. In this section we present results of numerical experiments. As a first test problem we consider the Laplace-Beltrami equation on the unit sphere: u = f on, with = {x R 3 x 2 = 1} and Ω = ( 2, 2 3. The source term f is taken such that the solution is given by u(x = a ( 3x 2 x 3 1 x 2 x 3 2, x = (x1, x 2, x 3 Ω, with a = 12. Using the representation of u in spherical coordinates one can verify that u is an eigenfunction of : u(r, φ, θ = a sin(3φsin 3 θ, u = 12u =: f(r, φ, θ. (4.1 The right handside f satisfies the compatibility condition f ds = 0, likewise does u. Note that u and f are constant along normals at. A family {T l } l 0 of tetrahedral triangulations of Ω is constructed as follows. We triangulate Ω by starting with a uniform subdivision into 48 tetrahedra with mesh size h 0 = 3. Then we apply an adaptive red-green refinement-algorithm (implemented 17
18 in the software package DROPS [4] in which in each refinement step the tetrahedra that contain are refined such that on level l = 1, 2,... we have h T 3 2 l for all T T l with T. The family {T l } l 0 is consistent and shape-regular. The interface is the zero-level of ϕ(x := x 2 1. Let ϕ h := I(ϕ where I is the standard nodal interpolation operator on T l. The discrete interface is given by hl := {x Ω I(φ h (x = 0 }, cf. (2.4. Let {φ i } 1 i m be the nodal basis functions corresponding to the vertices of the tetrahedra in ω h, as explained in remark 2. The entries h h φ i h φ j ds h of the stiffness matrix are computed within machine accuracy. For the right handside of the Galerkin discretization (2.8 we need an extension f h of f. In order to be consistent with the theoretical analysis we take the constant extension of f along the normals at, i.e. we take f h (r, φ, θ = f(1, φ, θ + c h, with f(r, φ, θ as in (4.1 and c h such that h f h ds h = 0. For the computation of the integrals T f hψ h ds h we use a quadrature-rule that is exact up to order five. The computed solution u h is normalized such that h u h ds h = 0. The discrete problem is solved using a standard CG method with symmetric Gauss-Seidel preconditioner to a relative tolerance of The number of iterations needed on level l = 1, 2,..., 7, is 14, 25, 50, 101, 209, 417, 837, respectively. The discretization errors in the L 2 ( h -norm are given in table 4.1. The extension u e of u is given by u e (r, φ, θ := u(1, φ, θ, cf. (4.1. level l u e u h L 2 ( h factor Table 4.1 Discretization errors and error reduction. These results clearly show the h 2 behaviour as predicted by our theoretical analysis. To illustrate the fact that in this approach the triangulation of the approximate manifold h is strongly shape-irregular we show a part of this triangulation in Figure 4.1. The discrete solution is visualized in Fig To demonstrate the flexibility of the method with respect to the form of we repeat the previous experiment but now with a torus instead of the unit sphere. Ω = ( 2, 2 3 with = {x Ω r 2 = x ( x x2 2 R2 }. We take R = 1 and r = 0.6. In the coordinate system (ρ, φ, θ with x = R cosφ sin φ + ρ cosφcos θ sin φcosθ 0 sin θ the ρ-direction is normal to, x ρ for x. Thus the following solution u and 18
19 Fig Detail of the induced triangulation of h. Fig Level lines of the discrete solution u h corresponding right-hand side f are constant in normal direction: u(x = sin(3φcos(3θ + φ, f(x = r 2 (9 sin(3φcos(3θ + φ (R + r cos(θ 2 ( 10 sin(3φcos(3θ + φ 6 cos(3φsin(3θ + φ (r(r + r cos(θ 1 (3 sin(θsin(3φsin(3θ + φ (4.2 Both u and f satisfy the zero mean compatibility condition. level l u e u h L 2 ( h factor Table 4.2 Torus: Discretization errors and error reduction. The discretization errors in the L 2 ( h -norm are given in table 4.2. The extension u e of u is given by u e (ρ, φ, θ := u(r, φ, θ, cf. (4.2. Again we observe the h 2 behaviour 19
20 Fig Torus: Level lines of the discrete solution u h as predicted by the theoretical analysis. The discrete solution is visualized in Fig Acknowledgements. The authors thank the referees for their comments and suggestions. These led to a significantly improved revised version. REFERENCES [1] D. Braess, Finite Elements: Theory, Fast Solvers, and Applications in Solid Mechanics, 3d edition, Cambridge University Press, [2] K. Deckelnick, G. Dziuk, C. M. Elliott, and C.-J. Heine, An h-narrow band finite element method for elliptic equations on implicit surfaces, IMA J. Numer. Anal., doi: /imanum/drn049 (2009. [3] A. Demlow and G. Dziuk, An adaptive finite element method for the Laplace-Beltrami operator on implicitly defined surfaces, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 45 (2007, pp [4] DROPS package. [5] G. Dziuk, Finite elements for the beltrami operator on arbitrary surfaces, in Partial differential equations and calculus of variations, S. Hildebrandt and R. Leis, eds., vol of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, 1988, pp [6] S. Groß, V. Reichelt, and A. Reusken, A finite element based level set method for two-phase incompressible flows, Comp. Vis. Sci., 9 (2006, pp [7] S. Groß and A. Reusken, An extended pressure finite element space for two-phase incompressible flows, J. Comp. Phys., 224 (2007, pp [8], Finite element discretization error analysis of a surface tension force in two-phase incompressible flows, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 45 (2007, pp [9] A. James and J. Lowengrub, A surfactant-conserving volume-of-fluid method for interfacial flows with insoluble surfactant, J. Comp. Phys., 201 (2004, pp [10] M. Muradoglu and G. Tryggvason, A front-tracking method for computation of interfacial flows with soluble surfactant, J. Comput. Phys., 227 (2008, pp [11] M. A. Olshanskii and A. Reusken, A finite element method for surface pdes: Matrix properties, Preprint 287, IGPM, RWTH Aachen, [12] L. E. Payne and H. F. Weinberger, An optimal poincare inequality in convex domains, Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal., 5 (1960, pp [13] S. L. Sobolev, Some Applications of Functional Analysis in Mathematical Physics. Third Edition, AMS,
c 2009 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
SIAM J. NUMER. ANAL. Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 3339 3358 c 2009 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics A FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS ON SURFACES MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII, ARNOLD REUSKEN,
More informationOn Surface Meshes Induced by Level Set Functions
On Surface Meshes Induced by Level Set Functions Maxim A. Olshanskii, Arnold Reusken, and Xianmin Xu Bericht Nr. 347 Oktober 01 Key words: surface finite elements, level set function, surface triangulation,
More informationA VOLUME MESH FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR PDES ON SURFACES
European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ECCOMAS 2012) J. Eberhardsteiner et.al. (eds.) Vienna, Austria, September 10-14, 2012 A VOLUME MESH FINIE ELEMEN MEHOD FOR
More informationNumerische Mathematik
Numer. Math. DOI.7/s2-9-26-4 Numerische Mathematik A finite element method for surface PDEs: matrix properties Maxim A. Olshanskii Arnold Reusken Received: 3 October 28 / Revised: 9 June 29 Springer-Verlag
More informationAnalysis of a high order trace finite element method for PDEs on level set surfaces
N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 6 P R E P R I N T 4 5 7 Analysis of a high order trace finite element method for PDEs on level set surfaces Jörg Grande *, Christoph Lehrenfeld and Arnold Reusken * Institut für Geometrie
More informationA Higher Order Finite Element Method for Partial Differential Equations on Surfaces
A Higher Order Finite Element Method for Partial Differential Equations on Surfaces Jörg Grande and Arnold Reusken Preprint No. 403 July 2014 Key words: Laplace Beltrami equation, surface finite element
More informationA STABILIZED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ADVECTION-DIFFUSION EQUATIONS ON SURFACES
A SABILIZD FINI LMN MHOD FOR ADVCION-DIFFUSION QUAIONS ON SURFACS MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII, ARNOLD RUSKN, AND XIANMIN XU Abstract. A recently developed ulerian finite element method is applied to solve advectiondiffusion
More informationProjected Surface Finite Elements for Elliptic Equations
Available at http://pvamu.edu/aam Appl. Appl. Math. IN: 1932-9466 Vol. 8, Issue 1 (June 2013), pp. 16 33 Applications and Applied Mathematics: An International Journal (AAM) Projected urface Finite Elements
More informationError analysis of a space-time finite element method for solving PDEs on evolving surfaces
Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing Preprint Seria Error analysis of a space-time finite element method for solving PDEs on evolving surfaces M.A. Olshanskii A. Reusken Preprint #9 Department of
More informationA Finite Element Method for the Surface Stokes Problem
J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 8 P R E P R I N T 4 7 5 A Finite Element Method for the Surface Stokes Problem Maxim A. Olshanskii *, Annalisa Quaini, Arnold Reusken and Vladimir Yushutin Institut für Geometrie und
More informationIntrinsic finite element modeling of a linear membrane shell problem
arxiv:3.39v [math.na] 5 Mar Intrinsic finite element modeling of a linear membrane shell problem Peter Hansbo Mats G. Larson Abstract A Galerkin finite element method for the membrane elasticity problem
More informationIntrinsic finite element modeling of a linear membrane shell problem
RR Intrinsic finite element modeling of a linear membrane shell problem PETER HANSBO AND MATS G. LARSON School of Engineering Jönköping University Research Report No. : ISSN -8 Intrinsic finite element
More informationStabilized Finite Element Approximation of the Mean Curvature Vector on Closed Surfaces
arxiv:1407.3043v1 [math.na] 11 Jul 2014 Stabilized Finite Element Approximation of the Mean Curvature Vector on Closed Surfaces Peter Hansbo Mats G. Larson Sara Zahedi October 17, 2018 Abstract We develop
More informationScientific Computing WS 2018/2019. Lecture 15. Jürgen Fuhrmann Lecture 15 Slide 1
Scientific Computing WS 2018/2019 Lecture 15 Jürgen Fuhrmann juergen.fuhrmann@wias-berlin.de Lecture 15 Slide 1 Lecture 15 Slide 2 Problems with strong formulation Writing the PDE with divergence and gradient
More informationA NARROW-BAND UNFITTED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC PDES POSED ON SURFACES
MATHEMATICS OF COMPUTATION Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000 000 S 0025-5718(XX)0000-0 A NARROW-BAND UNFITTED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC PDES POSED ON SURFACES MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII AND DANIL SAFIN
More informationScientific Computing WS 2017/2018. Lecture 18. Jürgen Fuhrmann Lecture 18 Slide 1
Scientific Computing WS 2017/2018 Lecture 18 Jürgen Fuhrmann juergen.fuhrmann@wias-berlin.de Lecture 18 Slide 1 Lecture 18 Slide 2 Weak formulation of homogeneous Dirichlet problem Search u H0 1 (Ω) (here,
More informationA STOKES INTERFACE PROBLEM: STABILITY, FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS AND A ROBUST SOLVER
European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering ECCOMAS 2004 P. Neittaanmäki, T. Rossi, K. Majava, and O. Pironneau (eds.) O. Nevanlinna and R. Rannacher (assoc. eds.) Jyväskylä,
More informationAn Extended Finite Element Method for a Two-Phase Stokes problem
XFEM project An Extended Finite Element Method for a Two-Phase Stokes problem P. Lederer, C. Pfeiler, C. Wintersteiger Advisor: Dr. C. Lehrenfeld August 5, 2015 Contents 1 Problem description 2 1.1 Physics.........................................
More informationKey words. Surface, interface, finite element, level set method, adaptivity, error estimator
AN ADAPIVE SURFACE FINIE ELEMEN MEHOD BASED ON VOLUME MESHES ALAN DEMLOW AND MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII Abstract. In this paper we define an adaptive version of a recently introduced finite element method for
More informationHigh Order Unfitted Finite Element Methods for Interface Problems and PDEs on Surfaces
N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 6 P R E P R I N T 4 5 9 High Order Unfitted Finite Element Methods for Interface Problems and PDEs on Surfaces Christoph Lehrenfeld and Arnold Reusken Institut für Geometrie und Praktische
More informationLECTURE 1: SOURCES OF ERRORS MATHEMATICAL TOOLS A PRIORI ERROR ESTIMATES. Sergey Korotov,
LECTURE 1: SOURCES OF ERRORS MATHEMATICAL TOOLS A PRIORI ERROR ESTIMATES Sergey Korotov, Institute of Mathematics Helsinki University of Technology, Finland Academy of Finland 1 Main Problem in Mathematical
More informationINTRODUCTION TO FINITE ELEMENT METHODS
INTRODUCTION TO FINITE ELEMENT METHODS LONG CHEN Finite element methods are based on the variational formulation of partial differential equations which only need to compute the gradient of a function.
More informationOn a Discontinuous Galerkin Method for Surface PDEs
On a Discontinuous Galerkin Method for Surface PDEs Pravin Madhavan (joint work with Andreas Dedner and Bjo rn Stinner) Mathematics and Statistics Centre for Doctoral Training University of Warwick Applied
More informationLECTURE # 0 BASIC NOTATIONS AND CONCEPTS IN THE THEORY OF PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS (PDES)
LECTURE # 0 BASIC NOTATIONS AND CONCEPTS IN THE THEORY OF PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS (PDES) RAYTCHO LAZAROV 1 Notations and Basic Functional Spaces Scalar function in R d, d 1 will be denoted by u,
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.na] 4 Feb 2016
Full Gradient Stabilized Cut Finite Element Methods for Surface Partial Differential Equations Erik Burman a, Peter Hansbo b, Mats G. Larson c, André Massing c,, Sara Zahedi d arxiv:1602.01512v1 [math.na]
More informationGeometric bounds for Steklov eigenvalues
Geometric bounds for Steklov eigenvalues Luigi Provenzano École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland Joint work with Joachim Stubbe June 20, 2017 luigi.provenzano@epfl.ch (EPFL) Steklov eigenvalues
More informationA Multigrid Method for Two Dimensional Maxwell Interface Problems
A Multigrid Method for Two Dimensional Maxwell Interface Problems Susanne C. Brenner Department of Mathematics and Center for Computation & Technology Louisiana State University USA JSA 2013 Outline A
More informationA Stabilized Finite Element Method for the Darcy Problem on Surfaces
arxiv:1511.03747v1 [math.na] 12 Nov 2015 A Stabilized Finite Element Method for the Darcy Problem on Surfaces Peter Hansbo Mats G. Larson October 8, 2018 Abstract We consider a stabilized finite element
More informationACM/CMS 107 Linear Analysis & Applications Fall 2017 Assignment 2: PDEs and Finite Element Methods Due: 7th November 2017
ACM/CMS 17 Linear Analysis & Applications Fall 217 Assignment 2: PDEs and Finite Element Methods Due: 7th November 217 For this assignment the following MATLAB code will be required: Introduction http://wwwmdunloporg/cms17/assignment2zip
More informationAdaptive Finite Element Methods Lecture Notes Winter Term 2017/18. R. Verfürth. Fakultät für Mathematik, Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Adaptive Finite Element Methods Lecture Notes Winter Term 2017/18 R. Verfürth Fakultät für Mathematik, Ruhr-Universität Bochum Contents Chapter I. Introduction 7 I.1. Motivation 7 I.2. Sobolev and finite
More informationSimple Examples on Rectangular Domains
84 Chapter 5 Simple Examples on Rectangular Domains In this chapter we consider simple elliptic boundary value problems in rectangular domains in R 2 or R 3 ; our prototype example is the Poisson equation
More informationASYMPTOTICALLY EXACT A POSTERIORI ESTIMATORS FOR THE POINTWISE GRADIENT ERROR ON EACH ELEMENT IN IRREGULAR MESHES. PART II: THE PIECEWISE LINEAR CASE
MATEMATICS OF COMPUTATION Volume 73, Number 246, Pages 517 523 S 0025-5718(0301570-9 Article electronically published on June 17, 2003 ASYMPTOTICALLY EXACT A POSTERIORI ESTIMATORS FOR TE POINTWISE GRADIENT
More informationMULTIGRID PRECONDITIONING IN H(div) ON NON-CONVEX POLYGONS* Dedicated to Professor Jim Douglas, Jr. on the occasion of his seventieth birthday.
MULTIGRID PRECONDITIONING IN H(div) ON NON-CONVEX POLYGONS* DOUGLAS N ARNOLD, RICHARD S FALK, and RAGNAR WINTHER Dedicated to Professor Jim Douglas, Jr on the occasion of his seventieth birthday Abstract
More informationPIECEWISE LINEAR FINITE ELEMENT METHODS ARE NOT LOCALIZED
PIECEWISE LINEAR FINITE ELEMENT METHODS ARE NOT LOCALIZED ALAN DEMLOW Abstract. Recent results of Schatz show that standard Galerkin finite element methods employing piecewise polynomial elements of degree
More informationRobust preconditioning for XFEM applied to time-dependent Stokes problems
Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing Preprint Seria Robust preconditioning for XFEM applied to time-dependent Stokes problems S. Gross T. Ludescher M.A. Olshanskii A. Reusken Preprint #40 Department
More informationLecture on: Numerical sparse linear algebra and interpolation spaces. June 3, 2014
Lecture on: Numerical sparse linear algebra and interpolation spaces June 3, 2014 Finite dimensional Hilbert spaces and IR N 2 / 38 (, ) : H H IR scalar product and u H = (u, u) u H norm. Finite dimensional
More informationAnalysis of a DG XFEM Discretization for a Class of Two Phase Mass Transport Problems
Analysis of a DG XFEM Discretization for a Class of Two Phase Mass Transport Problems Christoph Lehrenfeld and Arnold Reusken Bericht Nr. 340 April 2012 Key words: transport problem, Nitsche method, XFEM,
More informationKey words. surface PDE, finite element method, transport equations, advection-diffusion equation, SUPG stabilization
A SABILIZED FINIE ELEMEN MEHOD FOR ADVECION-DIFFUSION EQUAIONS ON SURFACES MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII, ARNOLD REUSKEN, AND XIANMIN XU Abstract. A recently developed Eulerian finite element metod is applied to
More informationNodal O(h 4 )-superconvergence of piecewise trilinear FE approximations
Preprint, Institute of Mathematics, AS CR, Prague. 2007-12-12 INSTITTE of MATHEMATICS Academy of Sciences Czech Republic Nodal O(h 4 )-superconvergence of piecewise trilinear FE approximations Antti Hannukainen
More informationOptimal preconditioners for Nitsche-XFEM discretizations of interface problems
Optimal preconditioners for Nitsche-XFEM discretizations of interface problems Christoph Lehrenfeld Arnold Reusken August 13, 2014 In the past decade, a combination of unfitted finite elements (or XFEM)
More informationHamburger Beiträge zur Angewandten Mathematik
Hamburger Beiträge zur Angewandten Mathematik Numerical analysis of a control and state constrained elliptic control problem with piecewise constant control approximations Klaus Deckelnick and Michael
More informationSUPERCONVERGENCE PROPERTIES FOR OPTIMAL CONTROL PROBLEMS DISCRETIZED BY PIECEWISE LINEAR AND DISCONTINUOUS FUNCTIONS
SUPERCONVERGENCE PROPERTIES FOR OPTIMAL CONTROL PROBLEMS DISCRETIZED BY PIECEWISE LINEAR AND DISCONTINUOUS FUNCTIONS A. RÖSCH AND R. SIMON Abstract. An optimal control problem for an elliptic equation
More informationLecture 9 Approximations of Laplace s Equation, Finite Element Method. Mathématiques appliquées (MATH0504-1) B. Dewals, C.
Lecture 9 Approximations of Laplace s Equation, Finite Element Method Mathématiques appliquées (MATH54-1) B. Dewals, C. Geuzaine V1.2 23/11/218 1 Learning objectives of this lecture Apply the finite difference
More informationFinite Elements. Colin Cotter. January 15, Colin Cotter FEM
Finite Elements January 15, 2018 Why Can solve PDEs on complicated domains. Have flexibility to increase order of accuracy and match the numerics to the physics. has an elegant mathematical formulation
More informationUNIFORM PRECONDITIONERS FOR A PARAMETER DEPENDENT SADDLE POINT PROBLEM WITH APPLICATION TO GENERALIZED STOKES INTERFACE EQUATIONS
UNIFORM PRECONDITIONERS FOR A PARAMETER DEPENDENT SADDLE POINT PROBLEM WITH APPLICATION TO GENERALIZED STOKES INTERFACE EQUATIONS MAXIM A. OLSHANSKII, JÖRG PETERS, AND ARNOLD REUSKEN Abstract. We consider
More informationChapter 6. Finite Element Method. Literature: (tiny selection from an enormous number of publications)
Chapter 6 Finite Element Method Literature: (tiny selection from an enormous number of publications) K.J. Bathe, Finite Element procedures, 2nd edition, Pearson 2014 (1043 pages, comprehensive). Available
More information[2] (a) Develop and describe the piecewise linear Galerkin finite element approximation of,
269 C, Vese Practice problems [1] Write the differential equation u + u = f(x, y), (x, y) Ω u = 1 (x, y) Ω 1 n + u = x (x, y) Ω 2, Ω = {(x, y) x 2 + y 2 < 1}, Ω 1 = {(x, y) x 2 + y 2 = 1, x 0}, Ω 2 = {(x,
More informationA Robust Preconditioner for the Hessian System in Elliptic Optimal Control Problems
A Robust Preconditioner for the Hessian System in Elliptic Optimal Control Problems Etereldes Gonçalves 1, Tarek P. Mathew 1, Markus Sarkis 1,2, and Christian E. Schaerer 1 1 Instituto de Matemática Pura
More informationA note on accurate and efficient higher order Galerkin time stepping schemes for the nonstationary Stokes equations
A note on accurate and efficient higher order Galerkin time stepping schemes for the nonstationary Stokes equations S. Hussain, F. Schieweck, S. Turek Abstract In this note, we extend our recent work for
More informationWave equation on manifolds and finite speed of propagation
Wave equation on manifolds and finite speed of propagation Ethan Y. Jaffe Let M be a Riemannian manifold (without boundary), and let be the (negative of) the Laplace-Beltrami operator. In this note, we
More informationLecture Note III: Least-Squares Method
Lecture Note III: Least-Squares Method Zhiqiang Cai October 4, 004 In this chapter, we shall present least-squares methods for second-order scalar partial differential equations, elastic equations of solids,
More informationOn an Approximation Result for Piecewise Polynomial Functions. O. Karakashian
BULLETIN OF THE GREE MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 57, 010 (1 7) On an Approximation Result for Piecewise Polynomial Functions O. arakashian Abstract We provide a new approach for proving approximation results
More informationFinite Element Method for Ordinary Differential Equations
52 Chapter 4 Finite Element Method for Ordinary Differential Equations In this chapter we consider some simple examples of the finite element method for the approximate solution of ordinary differential
More informationi=1 α i. Given an m-times continuously
1 Fundamentals 1.1 Classification and characteristics Let Ω R d, d N, d 2, be an open set and α = (α 1,, α d ) T N d 0, N 0 := N {0}, a multiindex with α := d i=1 α i. Given an m-times continuously differentiable
More informationA Finite Element Method Using Singular Functions for Poisson Equations: Mixed Boundary Conditions
A Finite Element Method Using Singular Functions for Poisson Equations: Mixed Boundary Conditions Zhiqiang Cai Seokchan Kim Sangdong Kim Sooryun Kong Abstract In [7], we proposed a new finite element method
More informationMaximum norm estimates for energy-corrected finite element method
Maximum norm estimates for energy-corrected finite element method Piotr Swierczynski 1 and Barbara Wohlmuth 1 Technical University of Munich, Institute for Numerical Mathematics, piotr.swierczynski@ma.tum.de,
More informationPast, present and space-time
Past, present and space-time Arnold Reusken Chair for Numerical Mathematics RWTH Aachen Utrecht, 12.11.2015 Reusken (RWTH Aachen) Past, present and space-time Utrecht, 12.11.2015 1 / 20 Outline Past. Past
More informationPARTITION OF UNITY FOR THE STOKES PROBLEM ON NONMATCHING GRIDS
PARTITION OF UNITY FOR THE STOES PROBLEM ON NONMATCHING GRIDS CONSTANTIN BACUTA AND JINCHAO XU Abstract. We consider the Stokes Problem on a plane polygonal domain Ω R 2. We propose a finite element method
More informationLECTURE 15: COMPLETENESS AND CONVEXITY
LECTURE 15: COMPLETENESS AND CONVEXITY 1. The Hopf-Rinow Theorem Recall that a Riemannian manifold (M, g) is called geodesically complete if the maximal defining interval of any geodesic is R. On the other
More informationNon-Conforming Finite Element Methods for Nonmatching Grids in Three Dimensions
Non-Conforming Finite Element Methods for Nonmatching Grids in Three Dimensions Wayne McGee and Padmanabhan Seshaiyer Texas Tech University, Mathematics and Statistics (padhu@math.ttu.edu) Summary. In
More informationAN EXTENDED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD APPLIED TO LEVITATED DROPLET PROBLEMS
AN EXTENDED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD APPLIED TO LEVITATED DROPLET PROBLEMS PATRICK ESSER, JÖRG GRANDE, ARNOLD REUSKEN Abstract. We consider a standard model for incompressible two-phase flows in which a localized
More informationNUMERICAL SIMULATION OF INCOMPRESSIBLE TWO-PHASE FLOWS WITH A BOUSSINESQ-SCRIVEN INTERFACE STRESS TENSOR
NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF INCOMPRESSIBLE TWO-PHASE FLOWS WITH A BOUSSINESQ-SCRIVEN INTERFACE STRESS TENSOR ARNOLD REUSKEN AND YUANJUN ZHANG Abstract. We consider the numerical simulation of a three-dimensional
More informationNitsche XFEM with Streamline Diffusion Stabilization for a Two Phase Mass Transport Problem
Nitsche XFEM with Streamline Diffusion Stabilization for a Two Phase Mass Transport Problem Christoph Lehrenfeld and Arnold Reusken Bericht Nr. 333 November 2011 Key words: transport problem, Nitsche method,
More informationDomain Decomposition Algorithms for an Indefinite Hypersingular Integral Equation in Three Dimensions
Domain Decomposition Algorithms for an Indefinite Hypersingular Integral Equation in Three Dimensions Ernst P. Stephan 1, Matthias Maischak 2, and Thanh Tran 3 1 Institut für Angewandte Mathematik, Leibniz
More informationETNA Kent State University
Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis. Volume 37, pp. 166-172, 2010. Copyright 2010,. ISSN 1068-9613. ETNA A GRADIENT RECOVERY OPERATOR BASED ON AN OBLIQUE PROJECTION BISHNU P. LAMICHHANE Abstract.
More informationENERGY NORM A POSTERIORI ERROR ESTIMATES FOR MIXED FINITE ELEMENT METHODS
ENERGY NORM A POSTERIORI ERROR ESTIMATES FOR MIXED FINITE ELEMENT METHODS CARLO LOVADINA AND ROLF STENBERG Abstract The paper deals with the a-posteriori error analysis of mixed finite element methods
More informationLecture Notes on PDEs
Lecture Notes on PDEs Alberto Bressan February 26, 2012 1 Elliptic equations Let IR n be a bounded open set Given measurable functions a ij, b i, c : IR, consider the linear, second order differential
More informationHigh order, finite volume method, flux conservation, finite element method
FLUX-CONSERVING FINITE ELEMENT METHODS SHANGYOU ZHANG, ZHIMIN ZHANG, AND QINGSONG ZOU Abstract. We analyze the flux conservation property of the finite element method. It is shown that the finite element
More informationFinite Elements. Colin Cotter. February 22, Colin Cotter FEM
Finite Elements February 22, 2019 In the previous sections, we introduced the concept of finite element spaces, which contain certain functions defined on a domain. Finite element spaces are examples of
More informationFinite Element Techniques for the Numerical Simulation of Two-Phase Flows with Mass Transport
Finite Element Techniques for the Numerical Simulation of Two-Phase Flows with Mass Transport Christoph Lehrenfeld and Arnold Reusken Preprint No. 413 December 2014 Key words: Two-phase flow, mass transport,
More informationPartial Differential Equations
Part II Partial Differential Equations Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2015 Paper 4, Section II 29E Partial Differential Equations 72 (a) Show that the Cauchy problem for u(x,
More informationNumerische Mathematik
Numer. Math. (006) 105:159 191 DOI 10.1007/s0011-006-0031-4 Numerische Mathematik Uniform preconditioners for a parameter dependent saddle point problem with application to generalized Stokes interface
More informationSecond Order Elliptic PDE
Second Order Elliptic PDE T. Muthukumar tmk@iitk.ac.in December 16, 2014 Contents 1 A Quick Introduction to PDE 1 2 Classification of Second Order PDE 3 3 Linear Second Order Elliptic Operators 4 4 Periodic
More informationAn Iterative Substructuring Method for Mortar Nonconforming Discretization of a Fourth-Order Elliptic Problem in two dimensions
An Iterative Substructuring Method for Mortar Nonconforming Discretization of a Fourth-Order Elliptic Problem in two dimensions Leszek Marcinkowski Department of Mathematics, Warsaw University, Banacha
More informationGraded Mesh Refinement and Error Estimates of Higher Order for DGFE-solutions of Elliptic Boundary Value Problems in Polygons
Graded Mesh Refinement and Error Estimates of Higher Order for DGFE-solutions of Elliptic Boundary Value Problems in Polygons Anna-Margarete Sändig, Miloslav Feistauer University Stuttgart, IANS Journées
More informationDownloaded 11/21/16 to Redistribution subject to SIAM license or copyright; see
SIAM J. SCI. COMPUT. Vol. 38, No. 6, pp. A349 A3514 c 016 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics ROBUST PRECONDITIONING FOR XFEM APPLIED TO TIME-DEPENDENT STOKES PROBLEMS SVEN GROSS, THOMAS LUDESCHER,
More informationPriority Program 1253
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Priority Program 1253 Optimization with Partial Differential Equations Klaus Deckelnick and Michael Hinze A note on the approximation of elliptic control problems with bang-bang
More informationVariational Formulations
Chapter 2 Variational Formulations In this chapter we will derive a variational (or weak) formulation of the elliptic boundary value problem (1.4). We will discuss all fundamental theoretical results that
More informationNumerical Methods for the Navier-Stokes equations
Arnold Reusken Numerical Methods for the Navier-Stokes equations January 6, 212 Chair for Numerical Mathematics RWTH Aachen Contents 1 The Navier-Stokes equations.............................................
More informationAn h-narrow band finite-element method for elliptic equations on implicit surfaces
IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis (2010) 30, 351 376 doi:10.1093/imanum/drn049 Advance Access publication on March 4, 2009 An h-narrow band finite-element method for elliptic equations on implicit surfaces
More informationA Domain Decomposition Method for Quasilinear Elliptic PDEs Using Mortar Finite Elements
W I S S E N T E C H N I K L E I D E N S C H A F T A Domain Decomposition Method for Quasilinear Elliptic PDEs Using Mortar Finite Elements Matthias Gsell and Olaf Steinbach Institute of Computational Mathematics
More informationChapter Two: Numerical Methods for Elliptic PDEs. 1 Finite Difference Methods for Elliptic PDEs
Chapter Two: Numerical Methods for Elliptic PDEs Finite Difference Methods for Elliptic PDEs.. Finite difference scheme. We consider a simple example u := subject to Dirichlet boundary conditions ( ) u
More informationA non-standard Finite Element Method based on boundary integral operators
A non-standard Finite Element Method based on boundary integral operators Clemens Hofreither Ulrich Langer Clemens Pechstein June 30, 2010 supported by Outline 1 Method description Motivation Variational
More informationNumerical Approximation of Phase Field Models
Numerical Approximation of Phase Field Models Lecture 2: Allen Cahn and Cahn Hilliard Equations with Smooth Potentials Robert Nürnberg Department of Mathematics Imperial College London TUM Summer School
More informationImplicit Functions, Curves and Surfaces
Chapter 11 Implicit Functions, Curves and Surfaces 11.1 Implicit Function Theorem Motivation. In many problems, objects or quantities of interest can only be described indirectly or implicitly. It is then
More information1. Let a(x) > 0, and assume that u and u h are the solutions of the Dirichlet problem:
Mathematics Chalmers & GU TMA37/MMG800: Partial Differential Equations, 011 08 4; kl 8.30-13.30. Telephone: Ida Säfström: 0703-088304 Calculators, formula notes and other subject related material are not
More informationOUTLINE ffl CFD: elliptic pde's! Ax = b ffl Basic iterative methods ffl Krylov subspace methods ffl Preconditioning techniques: Iterative methods ILU
Preconditioning Techniques for Solving Large Sparse Linear Systems Arnold Reusken Institut für Geometrie und Praktische Mathematik RWTH-Aachen OUTLINE ffl CFD: elliptic pde's! Ax = b ffl Basic iterative
More informationNumerical Solution I
Numerical Solution I Stationary Flow R. Kornhuber (FU Berlin) Summerschool Modelling of mass and energy transport in porous media with practical applications October 8-12, 2018 Schedule Classical Solutions
More informationLaplace s Equation. Chapter Mean Value Formulas
Chapter 1 Laplace s Equation Let be an open set in R n. A function u C 2 () is called harmonic in if it satisfies Laplace s equation n (1.1) u := D ii u = 0 in. i=1 A function u C 2 () is called subharmonic
More informationAnalysis in weighted spaces : preliminary version
Analysis in weighted spaces : preliminary version Frank Pacard To cite this version: Frank Pacard. Analysis in weighted spaces : preliminary version. 3rd cycle. Téhéran (Iran, 2006, pp.75.
More informationA finite element level set method for anisotropic mean curvature flow with space dependent weight
A finite element level set method for anisotropic mean curvature flow with space dependent weight Klaus Deckelnick and Gerhard Dziuk Centre for Mathematical Analysis and Its Applications, School of Mathematical
More informationVARIATIONAL AND NON-VARIATIONAL MULTIGRID ALGORITHMS FOR THE LAPLACE-BELTRAMI OPERATOR.
VARIATIONAL AND NON-VARIATIONAL MULTIGRID ALGORITHMS FOR THE LAPLACE-BELTRAMI OPERATOR. ANDREA BONITO AND JOSEPH E. PASCIAK Abstract. We design and analyze variational and non-variational multigrid algorithms
More informationc 2014 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
SIAM J. NUMER. ANAL. Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 292 212 c 214 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics ERROR ANALYSIS OF A SPACE-TIME FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR SOLVING PDES ON EVOLVING SURFACES MAXIM A.
More informationMath 302 Outcome Statements Winter 2013
Math 302 Outcome Statements Winter 2013 1 Rectangular Space Coordinates; Vectors in the Three-Dimensional Space (a) Cartesian coordinates of a point (b) sphere (c) symmetry about a point, a line, and a
More informationA NOTE ON THE LADYŽENSKAJA-BABUŠKA-BREZZI CONDITION
A NOTE ON THE LADYŽENSKAJA-BABUŠKA-BREZZI CONDITION JOHNNY GUZMÁN, ABNER J. SALGADO, AND FRANCISCO-JAVIER SAYAS Abstract. The analysis of finite-element-like Galerkin discretization techniques for the
More informationTechnische Universität Graz
Technische Universität Graz A note on the stable coupling of finite and boundary elements O. Steinbach Berichte aus dem Institut für Numerische Mathematik Bericht 2009/4 Technische Universität Graz A
More informationIntroduction. J.M. Burgers Center Graduate Course CFD I January Least-Squares Spectral Element Methods
Introduction In this workshop we will introduce you to the least-squares spectral element method. As you can see from the lecture notes, this method is a combination of the weak formulation derived from
More informationfor all subintervals I J. If the same is true for the dyadic subintervals I D J only, we will write ϕ BMO d (J). In fact, the following is true
3 ohn Nirenberg inequality, Part I A function ϕ L () belongs to the space BMO() if sup ϕ(s) ϕ I I I < for all subintervals I If the same is true for the dyadic subintervals I D only, we will write ϕ BMO
More informationAn interpolation operator for H 1 functions on general quadrilateral and hexahedral meshes with hanging nodes
An interpolation operator for H 1 functions on general quadrilateral and hexahedral meshes with hanging nodes Vincent Heuveline Friedhelm Schieweck Abstract We propose a Scott-Zhang type interpolation
More informationPREPRINT 2010:23. A nonconforming rotated Q 1 approximation on tetrahedra PETER HANSBO
PREPRINT 2010:23 A nonconforming rotated Q 1 approximation on tetrahedra PETER HANSBO Department of Mathematical Sciences Division of Mathematics CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG
More information