L 2 -ERROR ESTIMATES FOR FINITE ELEMENT APPROXIMATIONS OF BOUNDARY FLUXES MATS G. LARSON AND ANDRÉ MASSING arxiv:1401.6994v1 [mat.na] 27 Jan 2014 Abstract. We prove quasi-optimal a priori error estimates for finite element approximations of boundary normal fluxes in te L 2 -norm. Our results are valid for a variety of different scemes for weakly enforcing Diriclet boundary conditions including Nitsce s metod, and Lagrange multiplier metods. Te proof is based on an error representation formula tat is derived by using a discrete dual problem wit L 2 -Diriclet boundary data and combines a weigted discrete stability estimate for te dual problem wit anisotropic interpolation estimates in te boundary zone. Key words. Boundary flux, L 2 -error estimates, discete dual problem, Nitsce s metod, Lagrange multipliers AMS subject classifications. 65N12, 65N15, 65N30 1. Introduction. Te normal flux at te boundary or on interior interfaces is in general of great interest in applications. Examples include surface stresses in mecanics, eat transfer troug interfaces, and transport of fluid in Darcy flow. Recently Melenk and Wolmut [15] as sown quasi-optimal order estimates for fluxes in a mortar setting were continuity and boundary conditions is enforced using a mortaring space of Lagrange multipliers. More precisely, tey sown tat te L 2 -norm of te error in te normal flux is of order ln for piecewise linear polynomials and of order k for piecewise polynomials of order k. In contrast only k 1/2 will be obtained if a trace inequality is used in combination wit standard convergence teory for saddle point problems, see [4]. In tis contribution we give an alternative proof of tis result and, focusing on te case k = 1, we also consider a wider variety of metods for weakly enforcing Dirclet boundary conditions, including Nitsce s metod and stable and stabilized Lagrange multipliers metods. Our proof is based on an error representation formula were te error in te normal flux is represented in terms of te interpolation error and te solution to a discrete dual problem wit L 2 -Diriclet boundary data. Key to te error estimate is a stability estimate for te discrete dual problem in terms of te L 2 -norm of te Diriclet data. In te continuous case suc an estimate is known, see Cabrowsky [8] and [9], and provides control of te gradient weigted wit te distance to te boundary as well as a max-norm control of te L 2 -norms of te solution on manifolds close to and parallel wit te boundary. We prove a corresponding stability estimate for our discrete dual problem. In contrast to te approac by Melenk and Wolmut [15], we avoid using a Besov space framework. Our error representation formula is related to te one derived in te Carey et al. [7], Giles et al. [12], Pelivanov et al. [17] were various estimates for functionals of te normal flux are derived and [10] were adaptive metods based on dual problems targeting te flux in a coupled problem are developed. Note owever tat in our setting were we seek an a priori estimate, we employ a discrete dual problem wile in te a posteriori setting, te corresponding continuous dual problem is used. Here we also establis te stability of te discrete dual problem using analytical tecniques wile in te duality based a posteriori error estimates, stability is often estimated using computational tecniques or a known analytical stability result. Te remainder of tis work is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce te model problem and its variational formulations we will consider trougout tis work. Corresponding finite element discretizations are presented in Section 3 togeter wit te definition of te discrete boundary fluxes. In Section 5 we prove stability bounds for te discrete dual problem and provide interpolation estimates of te solution close to te boundary. Combining tese results allows us to prove L 2 -error estimates for te boundary flux approximations in Section 6. In Section 7, we finally present numerical results illustrating te teoretical findings. Department of Matematics, Umeå University, SE-901 97 Umeå, Sweden. email: mats.larson@mat.umu.se Simula Researc Laboratory, P.O. Box 134, 1325 Lysaker, Norway. email: massing@simula.no 1
2. Model Problem. Let Ω be a polygonal domain in R d, d = 2, 3 wit boundary Ω. We consider te elliptic model problem: find u : Ω R suc tat u = f in Ω 2.1 u = g on Ω 2.2 were f and g are given data. Ten te boundary flux σ n for te solution u is defined by σ n = n u 2.3 were n is te outwards pointing unit normal to Ω. In wat follows, we consider te standard Sobolev spaces H s U, s 0 on some domain U, endowed te te usual norms s,u and semi-norms s,u. More generally, te space W s,p U is defined as te Sobolev space consisting of all functions aving p-integrable derivates up to order s on U. As usual, H 0 Ω = L 2 Ω and H 1/2 Ω denotes te dual space of H 1/2 Ω. Moreover, for a function g H 1/2 Ω we introduce te notation H 1 g Ω = {v H 1 Ω : v Ω = g}. Te scalar product in H s U is written as, s,u and to simplify te notation, we generally omit te domain designation if U = Ω and te Sobolev index if s = 0 in bot norm and scalar product expressions. Using tis notation, a weak formulation of te elliptic boundary value problem 2.1 2.2 is to seek u H 1 g Ω suc tat were au, v = lv v H 1 0 Ω 2.4 au, v = u, v 2.5 lv = f, v 2.6 Here, te boundary condition u Ω = g is already incorporated into te trial space H 1 g Ω. Alternatively, te boundary condition 2.2 can be enforced weakly by using a Lagrange multiplier approac. Introducing te bilinear form bµ, v = µ, v Ω 2.7 te resulting variational formulation is given by te saddle point problem: find u, λ H 1 Ω H 1/2 Ω suc tat au, v + bλ, v + bµ, u = lv + bµ, g v, µ H 1 Ω H 1/2 Ω 2.8 For brevity, we migt denote te left-and side by Au, λ; v, µ and te rigt-and side Lv, µ. It is well-known [1, 5, 18, 22], tat te saddle point problem 2.8 satisfies te Babuška-Brezzi condition, in particular bλ, v sup µ 1/2, Ω µ H 1/2 Ω 2.9 v H 1 Ω\{0} v 1,Ω Consequently, problem 2.8 possesses a unique solution u, λ, were u solves 2.1 2.2 in a weak sense and te Lagrange multiplier λ represents te negative of te normal flux of u, i.e. λ = σ n. 3. Finite Element Discretizations of te Model Problem. In tis section, we introduce te finite element discretizations of problem 2.1 2.2 we will consider trougout tis work. Te discretizations are defined on a quasi-uniform partition T of Ω into sape regular triangles in two or tetraedra in tree space dimensions wit mes parameter. For a given mes T, let te associated finite element space of piecewise linear continuous functions be denoted by V. We do not assume V H 1 g Ω and consequently, te discretizations to be considered will enforce te boundary condition 2.2 weakly. For eac discretization we will define a discrete counterpart Σ n of te boundary flux 2.3. 2
3.1. Nitsce s Metod. Te Nitsce [16] finite element metod takes te form: find u V suc tat were te forms are defined by a u, v = l v v V 3.1 a u, v = au, v n u, v Ω n u, v Ω + β 1 u, v Ω 3.2 l v = lv g, n v Ω + β 1 g, v Ω 3.3 wit β being a positive parameter. Introducing te energy norm we recall tat te bilinear form a, is continuous v 2 = v 2 Ω + n v 2 Ω + 1 v 2 Ω 3.4 a u, v u v 3.5 and tat if te stabilization parameter β is large enoug, a coercivity condition is satisfied, yielding te standard error estimate v 2 a v, v v V 3.6 u u u 2 3.7 Here and trougout, we use te notation a b for a Cb for some generic constant C wic vary wit te context but is always independent of te mes size. For proofs of 3.6 and 3.7, we refer to [14, 16]. To Nitsce s metod 3.1, we associate te discrete variational normal flux of te form Σ n, v Ω = u, v Ω u g, n v Ω f, v Ω v V 3.8 were Σ n is te so-called Nitsce flux Σ n = n u β 1 u g 3.9 3.2. Lagrange Multiplier Metod. To formulate a finite element discretization of te saddle point problem 2.8, we assume tat a discrete function space Λ L 2 Ω H 1/2 Ω is given, and we equip V, Λ and te total approximation space V Λ wit te natural norms u 2 = u 2 Ω + 1/2 u 2 Ω 3.10 λ 2 = 1/2 λ 2 Ω 3.11 u, λ 2 = u 2 + λ 2 3.12 respectively, see Pitkäranta [18]. Employing te discrete norms v and µ, it is well-known [18, 19] tat te approximation space Λ as to be designed carefully in order to satisfy te discrete equivalent of te inf-sup condition 2.9. Terefore, a stabilized Lagrange multiplier metod as been proposed by Barbosa and Huges [2, 3] were residual terms were added to circumvent te inf-sup condition 3.17. Recently, a generalized approac based on projection stabilized Lagrange multipliers as been proposed by Burman [6]. To cover a broad range of stable and stabilized Lagrange multiplier metods, we assume tat te discrete saddle point problem is of te following form: find u, λ V Λ suc tat A u, λ ; v, µ = L v, µ v, µ V Λ 3.13 3
were A u, λ; v, µ = au, v + bλ, v + bµ, u c u, λ; v, µ 3.14 L v, µ = lv + g, µ Ω 3.15 Ten, te approximation of te normal flux 2.3 is naturally defined by te negative of te discrete Lagrange multiplier: Σ n = λ 3.16 In te variational form 3.14, te bilinear form c, represents a consistent, possibly vanising stabilization form suc te inf-sup condition olds, as well as te continuity condition and te error estimate A u, λ; v, µ sup u, λ 3.17 v,µ V Λ \{0,0} v, µ A u, λ; v, µ u, λ v, µ 3.18 u u, λ λ u 2,Ω + 3/2 λ 1, Ω 3.19 Well-known Lagrange multiplier discretizations wic are covered by tese assumptions are described and analyzed in [18, 19] and [2, 3, 22]. In [18, 19], Pitkäranta proved certain local stability conditions, rougly stating tat te pairing P 1 c T P 0 dc Γ H is stable, if te mes size H of a given discretization Γ H of te boundary Ω = Γ satisfies te condition ch for some c > 1. To avoid additional mesing of te boundary and to use te natural space Λ = {µ L 2 Ω µ P 0 F F T } defined on te trace mes T, a stabilized symmetric Lagrange Multiplier approac was proposed by Barbosa and Huges [2, 3]. Stenberg [22] simplified te approac by sowing tat te weak formulation 3.13 combined wit te stabilization form c u, λ; v, µ = αλ + n u, µ + n v Ω 3.20 satisfies te inf-sup condition 3.17, te continuity condition 3.18 and tus te error estimate 3.19 wen 0 < α < C I, wit C I being te constant in 5.11. Finally, we would like to mention te general approac by Burman [6]. In tis metod, te stabilization operator is given by some symmetric form c λ, µ wic, rougly speaking, controls te distance between a given discretization space Λ and anoter discrete space L were V L presents an inf-sup stable pairing. Generally, te stabilization form is only required to be optimal weakly consistent and to not clutter te presentation, we skip te details for te trivial adaption of our approac to tis variant. 4. Error Representation Formulas. In tis section, we establis te error representation formulas for te discrete boundary fluxes. Te representation formula will later allow us to bound te L 2 -error of te boundary flux approximations in terms of interpolation errors and a stability estimate for te discrete solution to a suitable dual problem. 4.1. Nitsce s Metod. For given boundary data ψ L 2 Ω, we define te discrete dual problem for Nitsce s metod as follows: find φ V suc tat were a, is defined in 3.2 and a v, φ = m ψ, v v V 4.1 m ψ, v = β 1 ψ, v Ω ψ, n v Ω 4.2 4
Setting v = e = π u u we obtain a e, φ = m ψ, e 4.3 Using Galerkin ortogonality, we note tat te left and side can be written and for te rigt and side were te second term takes te form a e, φ = a π u u, φ 4.4 m ψ, e = m ψ, π u u + m ψ, u u 4.5 m ψ, u u = β 1 u u, ψ n u u, ψ Ω 4.6 = β 1 g u + n u n u, ψ Ω 4.7 = Σ n u σ n u, ψ Ω 4.8 Collecting tese identities, we arrive at te error representation formula σ n u Σ n u, ψ Ω = a u π u, φ m ψ, u π u 4.9 Tus we ave te following Lemma 4.1. Wit σ n u and Σ n u defined by 2.3 and 3.8 it olds σ n u Σ n u Ω sup ψ L 2 Ω\{0} 1 a u π u, φ + m ψ, u π u ψ Ω 4.10 4.2. Lagrange Multiplier Metod. We consider te following discrete dual problem: find φ, θ V Λ suc tat were A, is defined as in 3.14 and A v, µ; φ, θ = m ψ, µ v, µ V Λ 4.11 m ψ, µ = ψ, µ Ω 4.12 Setting v, µ = π u u, π λ λ and using Galerkin ortogonality, we obtain m ψ, π λ λ = A π u u, π λ λ ; φ, θ = A π u u, π λ λ; φ, θ If we write λ λ, ψ = m ψ, λ π λ + m ψ, π λ λ, we arrive at an error representation form similar to 4.9: λ λ, ψ Ω = A π u u, π λ λ; φ, θ m ψ, λ π λ Consequently, te flux error σ n u Σ n u Ω = λ λ Ω can be estimated via following Lemma 4.2. It olds λ λ Ω sup ψ L 2 Ω\{0} 1 A π u u, π λ λ; φ, θ + m ψ, λ π λ ψ Ω 4.13 5
5. Stability Bounds for te Discrete Dual Problem. From te error representation formula stated in Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 4.2, we note tat in order to prove estimates for te flux in te L 2 -norm, we need to consider stability bounds in terms of te L 2 -norm of ψ. Cabrowski [9] proved suc estimates for te corresponding continuous problem: find φ : Ω R suc tat φ = 0 in Ω 5.1 u = ψ on Ω 5.2 wit ψ L 2 Ω. To state te basic energy type estimate, we sall introduce some notation tat will also be needed in our fortcoming developments. Let ρx = distx, Ω be te minimal distance between x Ω and Ω and px Ω be te point closest to x Ω. We note tat px = x + npxρx, were npx is te exterior unit normal to Ω at px, and tat tere is a constant δ 0 > 0, only dependent on te curvature of te boundary, suc tat for eac x Ω wit ρx δ 0 tere is a unique px Ω. Next, we define te sets Ω δ = {x Ω : ρx > δ} 5.3 were 0 δ δ 0, and we note tat te closest point mapping p : Ω δ Ω is a bijection wit inverse denoted by p 1 δ. Referring to [11, Lemma 14.16], we recall tat tat ρ Ck Ω δ for k 2 for δ 0 cosen small enoug. If we define a weigted norm v ρ,ω by v 2 ρ,ω = v 2 ρ dx ten Cabrowski [9] proved te following result for te continuous problem: if φ W 1,2 loc satisfies problem 5.1 5.2 in te sense tat ten φ p 1 δ ψ Ω 0 wen δ 0 + φ 2 ρ,ω + φ 2 ρ,ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ ψ 2 Ω. 0 δ δ 0 We sall now prove a corresponding estimate for te discrete dual problems 4.1 and 4.11. In order to formulate our results, we introduce te sifted weigt function and we let Ω ρ δ = max0, ρ δ, δ δ δ 0 5.4 δ = C 5.5 wit te constant C > 0 cosen suc tat ρ δ = 0 on all elements wit a face on te boundary Ω, see Figure 5.2. Te existence of suc a constant C follows from te assumed quasi-uniformity of te mes. In te case were Ω is not a C 2 -domain but rater a convex polyedral domain described by faces {F i } N i=1, we define stripes S δf i = {x R : x 0 F i t s.t. x = x 0 + t n 0 t δ}, cf. Figure 5.1. Ten te analysis presenting in tis work carries over by considering eac stripe at a time and te fact tat locally only a finite number of stripes overlaps. We state now te main result of tis section. Proposition 5.1. Let φ V be te solution of te discrete dual problem 4.1. Ten φ satisfies te stability estimate φ 2 ρ δ,ω + φ 2 Ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ + φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.6 0 δ δ 0 Alternatively, if φ, θ V Λ is te solution of te discrete dual problem 4.11, ten φ 2 ρ δ,ω + φ 2 Ω + 2 θ 2 Ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ + φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.7 0 δ δ 0 Before we present te elaborated proof of Proposition 5.1 in Section 5.2, te next section collects useful inequalities and interpolation estimates wic will be used trougout te remaining work. 6
F 1 δ F 2 F 6 Ω F 3 F 5 F 4 Fig. 5.1. Polyedral domain Ω wit faces {F i } 6 i=1 wit corresponding stripes S δf i carted in different colors. 5.1. Interpolation Error Estimates. We recall te following trace inequality for v H 1 Ω: v T 1/2 T v T + 1/2 T v T T T 5.8 v T Ω 1/2 T v T + 1/2 T v T T T 5.9 See Hansbo and Hansbo [13] for a proof of 5.9. inverse estimates for v V : We will also need te following well-known v T 1 T v T T T 5.10 1/2 n v F v T T T 5.11 Let π : L 2 Ω V be te standard Scott Zang interpolation operator [21] and recall te interpolation error estimates v π v r,t s r v s,ωt 0 r s 2 T T 5.12 v π v r,f s r 1/2 v s,ωt 0 r s 2 F F 5.13 were ωt is te patc of neigbors of element T ; tat is, te domain consisting of all elements saring a vertex wit T. Recalling te definition 5.3 of Ω δ, we introduce te -band T Ωδ for a mes T by T Ωδ = {T T : T Ω δ } 5.14 Tis is illustrated in Figure 5.2. We note tat tanks to te quasi-uniformity T Ωδ d Ω δ d 1 wit d and d 1 denoting te volume and area of te corresponding sets. Te trace inequality 5.9 allows to generalize te interpolation estimate 5.13 to If we in addition assume tat v π v r,t Ωδ s r 1/2 v s,ωt 0 r s 2 T T 5.15 sup D s u Ωδ ωt 1 5.16 0 δ δ 1 7
for some δ 1 suc tat ωt 0 δ δ 1 Ω δ, an order 1/2 can be recovered in estimate 5.13 and 5.15 by applying Hölder s inequality in normal direction to Ω δ : v π v r,t Ωδ s r sup 0 δ δ 0 D s u Ωδ ωt 0 r s 2 T T 5.17 We summarize our observations in te following global, anisotropic interpolation estimate: Proposition 5.2. Let u H 2 Ω and suppose tat sup 0 δ δ1 2 u Ωδ 1 for some δ 1 suc tat 0 δ δ 0 T Ωδ 0 δ δ 1 Ω δ. Ten te interpolation error satisfies sup u π u Ωδ + sup u π u Ωδ 2 sup 2 u Ωδ 5.18 0 δ δ 0 0 δ δ 0 0 δ δ 1 Note tat te previous interpolation estimates olds if u W 2, Ω is te finite element solution of 2.4 wit strongly imposed boundary conditions, see [20]. Here owever, we only require tat, rougly speaking, 2 u L 2 on manifolds close and parallel to te boundary and 2 u L in normal direction as quantified by assumption 5.16. 5.2. Weigted Energy Stability. In tis section, we finally prove Proposition 5.1. Te main idea of te proof is to divide te domain into an interior region and a boundary layer of tickness O. Away from te boundary, a weigted stability estimate can be proven by testing te discrete dual problems wit a weigted test function. Tis function is cosen suc tat it is identically zero in a layer of elements next to te boundary and tus te boundary terms in te discrete bilinear forms vanis. Since te desired weigted test function does not reside in V we approximate it wit a Lagrange interpolant and estimate te reminder. Witin te boundary layer, an estimate for te discrete energy stability emanating from te coercivity of te finite element metod is establised. Tis stability scales wit since te boundary data only resides in L 2 but it olds all te way out to te boundary. More specifically, te following lemma olds: Lemma 5.3 Discrete Energy Stability. Let φ V be te solution of te discrete dual problem 5.26. Ten for any κ 0 it olds φ 2 Ω + 2 n φ 2 Ω + κ φ 2 Ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ ψ 2 Ω 5.19 0 δ δ Alternatively, assume φ, θ V Q is te solution of te discrete dual problem 5.27. Ten for any κ 0 it olds φ 2 Ω + 2 θ 2 Ω + κ φ 2 Ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ C ψ 2 Ω 5.20 0 δ δ Proof. We note tat te estimate φ 2 = φ 2 Ω + κ φ 2 Ω + 2 n φ 2 Ω + φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.21 follows directly by setting v = φ in 5.26, using coercivity 3.1, and multiplying by. Furtermore, wit 0 δ δ 0 we find tat Tus for 0 δ δ, we ave φ 2 Ω δ φ 2 Ω + δ φ 2 Ω\Ω δ 5.22 sup φ 2 Ω δ φ 2 Ω + φ 2 Ω\Ω δ ψ 2 Ω 5.23 0 δ δ Combining 5.21 and 5.23 we arrive at te desired estimate. Te second estimate 5.20 can be sown similarly. Setting v, µ = φ, θ in 4.11, using te inf-sup condition 3.17 and multiplying wit, we directly obtain φ, θ 2 ψ 2 Ω 5.24 8
In particular, we ave φ 2 Ω + 2 θ 2 Ω + κ φ 2 Ω + φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.25 and using te estimate 5.22 once more, we arrive at te desired estimate. Proposition 5.4. If φ V satisfies or φ, θ V Λ satifies a v, φ + κv, φ = m ψ, v v V 5.26 A v, µ; φ, θ + κv, φ = m ψ, v, µ v, µ V Λ 5.27 wit a constant large enoug parameter κ > 0. estimate Ten, in bot cases, φ satisfies te stability φ 2 ρ δ,ω + φ 2 Ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ + φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.28 0 δ δ 0 Proof. First, we note tat discrete energy stability estimate provides sufficient control for δ. Let now δ be cosen suc tat 0 < δ < δ. Coosing te test function v = I ρ δ φ = ρ δ φ + I Iρ δ φ, δ δ δ 0 5.29 were I is te Lagrange interpolant, in 5.26 we obtain te identity 0 = a φ, I ρ δ φ + κφ, I ρ δ φ Ω 5.30 = φ, I ρ δ φ Ω + κφ, I ρ δ φ Ω = φ, I Iρ δ φ + κφ, I Iρ δ φ Ω }{{} I + φ, ρ δ φ + κφ, ρ δ φ Ω }{{} II = I + II 5.31 Note tat, due to our coice of δ, I ρ δ φ = 0 on all elements wit a face on Ω and tus m ψ and te boundary terms in a, and vanis. Term I. We divide te set of elements in te mes T into tree disjoint subsets T 0 = {T T : ρ δ = 0 on T } T Ωδ = {T T : T suppρ δ } T Ωδ = T \ T 0 T Ωδ For eac element, term I can be estimated in te following way: T T 0 : Clearly φ, I Iρ δ φ K = 0. T T Ωδ : Using a standard interpolation error estimate for te Lagrange interpolant, we conclude tat φ, I Iρ δ φ T φ T ρ δ φ 2,T φ T ρ δ W 2, T φ H 1 T φ 2 T + φ 2 T T T Ωδ 5.32 T T Ωδ : In tis case ρ δ is discontinuous in T and to deal wit tis difficulty, we use Green s formula as follows φ, I Iρ δ φ T = n φ, I Iρ δ φ T n φ T I Iρ δ φ T 1/2 φ T I Iρ δ φ T 1/2 φ T ρ δ φ T ɛ 1 φ 2 T + ɛ ρ δ φ 2 T 5.33 9
for eac ɛ > 0. Here we used an inverse inequality and te interpolation estimate v I v v F F v F v F on eac of te faces F T of element T. Here, F is te tangent gradient F v = P F associated wit te face F and P F = I n F n F, were n F is te unit normal to F, te projection onto te tangent space of F. Now ρ δ φ T can be estimated by observing tat ρ δ L T since T T Ωδ. Using Hölder s inequality, we ave ρ δ φ 2 T ρ δ 2 L T φ 2 T + ρ δ 2 L T φ 2 T φ 2 T + φ 2 T 1 φ 2 T + φ 2 T + φ 2 T were we again used a trace inequality and an inverse estimate. Combining 5.33 and 5.34, we tus ave 1 φ 2 T + φ 2 T 5.34 φ, I Iρ δ φ T ɛ 1 φ 2 T + ɛ 1 φ 2 T T T Ωδ 5.35 for all 0 < ɛ 1. Summing over te elements and using 5.32 and 5.35, we obtain I φ 2 T + φ 2 T + ɛ 1 φ 2 T + ɛ 1 φ 2 T T T Ωδ ɛ 1 T T T T Ωδ φ 2 T + φ 2 T + ɛ T T Ωδ sup 0 d δ 0 φ 2 T Ω d ɛ 1 ψ 2 Ω + ɛ sup φ 2 Ω d 5.36 δ d δ 0 for all 0 < ɛ 1. Term II. An application of Green s formula gives te following identity II = φ, ρ δ φ Ωδ + κρ δ φ, φ Ωδ = ρ δ φ, φ Ωδ + φ φ, ρ δ Ωδ + κρ δ φ, φ Ωδ = ρ δ φ, φ Ωδ + κρ δ φ, φ Ωδ 1 2 φ2, ρ δ Ωδ + 1 2 φ2, n ρ δ Ωδ We tus obtain te estimate φ 2 ρ δ,ω + κ ρ δ φ 2 Ω φ 2 Ω δ ρ δ L Ω δ + φ 2 Ω δ ρ δ L Ω δ + I 5.37 φ 2 Ω δ + φ 2 Ω δ + ɛ 1 ψ 2 Ω + ɛ sup δ d δ 0 φ 2 Ω d 5.38 φ 2 Ω δ + ɛ 1 ψ 2 Ω + ɛ sup φ 2 Ω d δ d δ 0 for δ δ δ. Here we used te estimate 5.36 for Term I in 5.37 and te estimate 5.23 to bound φ 2 Ω δ for δ δ δ in 5.38. Tus, letting δ δ we obtain φ 2 ρ δ,ω + κ φ 2 ρ δ,ω φ 2 Ω δ + ɛ 1 ψ 2 Ω + ɛ sup φ 2 Ω d 5.39 δ d δ 0 Using te fact n ρ c > 0 for δ 0 small enoug, we also obtain te bound sup φ 2 Ω δ φ 2 ρ δ δ,ω + κ φ 2 ρ δ,ω + φ 2 Ω δ + I δ δ0 φ 2 Ω δ + ɛ 1 ψ 2 Ω + ɛ sup φ 2 Ω d 5.40 δ d δ 0 10
were we used 5.36 and 5.39 in te second inequality. Coosing an appropriate ɛ and combining 5.39 and 5.40, we arrive at φ 2 ρ δ,ω + κ φ 2 ρ δ,ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ φ 2 Ω δ δ + ψ 2 Ω 5.41 δ δ0 To conclude te proof, we first note tat φ 2 Ω can be estimated by φ 2 Ω = φ 2 Ω\Ω d + φ 2 Ω d 5.42 d sup φ 2 Ω δ + d 1 φ 2 ρ,ω d 5.43 0 δ d Applying te same argument for te domain Ω δ and te sifted distance function ρ δ, we note tat by coosing δ < d δ 0 small enoug and κ large enoug, te term φ 2 Ω δ can be absorbed in te left and side of 5.41. Tus we finally ave te estimate φ 2 ρ δ,ω + κ φ 2 ρ δ,ω + sup φ 2 Ω δ ψ 2 Ω 5.44 δ δ δ0 Te proof now follows from combining 5.19 and 5.44. We are now in te position to finalize te proof of of Proposition 5.1: Proof. Proposition 5.1 We decompose te solution φ to 4.1 into a sum φ = φ,0 + φ,1 were and Setting v = φ,0 in 5.46 we find tat a φ,1, v + κφ,1, v = m ψ, v v V 5.45 a φ,0, v = κφ,1, v v V 5.46 φ,0 2 κ φ,1 Ω φ,0 Ω ψ Ω φ,0 5.47 were we used Caucy-Scwarz, Poincaré, and Proposition 5.4. Tus Using tis estimate, we also obtain Collecting te estimates we conclude tat te estimate φ,0 2 Ω + 1 φ,0 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 5.48 sup φ,0 2 Ω δ ψ 2 Ω 5.49 0 δ δ 0 φ,0 2 Ω + sup φ,0 2 Ω δ ψ 2 Ω 5.50 0 δ δ 0 olds. Observing tat tis estimate is stronger compared to te desired estimate and te triangle inequality, te estimate 5.50 for φ 0 and te estimate for φ,1 given by Proposition 5.4 we obtain te desired result. 6. L 2 Error Estimates for te Boundary Flux. Te previous results on te weigted stability estimate and te anisotropic interpolation error enable us to prove te main result of our work: Teorem 6.1. Let Σ n be te discrete boundary flux defined by eiter 3.9 or 3.16 and suppose u satisfies te assumption of Proposition 5.2. Ten te following error estimate olds σ n Σ n Ω ln 6.1 Proof. We start wit te proof of te estimate for te Nitsce flux 3.9. Recalling te estimate 4.10 in Lemma 4.1, we need to estimate I = a u π u, φ m ψ, u π u sup, II = sup 6.2 ψ L 2 Ω\{0} ψ Ω ψ L 2 Ω\{0} ψ Ω 11
δ Ω Ω δ Ω δ Ω δ T 0 δ Ω δ δ 0 Ω δ0 T Ωδ T Ωδ Fig. 5.2. Left Decomposition of te domain Ω into two boundary layers of widt and te far-field domain Ω δ0. Rigt Decomposition of te mes T wit respect to Ω δ consisting of a -band T Ωδ blue, an inner mes T Ωδ gray and a boundary zone T 0 wite. Estimate of I. We ave a u π u, φ = u π u, φ Ω n u π u, φ Ω 6.3 u π u, n φ Ω + β 1 u π u, φ Ω Te boundary terms may be directly estimated using a trace inequality followed by te interpolation error estimate 5.18 and te stability estimate 5.6. For instance, n u π u, φ Ω n u π u Ω φ Ω ψ Ω 6.4 u π u, n φ Ω 1 u π u Ω n φ Ω ψ Ω 6.5 and te oter terms may be estimated in te same way. To estimate te interior term we first split te integral as follows u π u, φ Ω = u π u, φ Ω\Ωδ 6.6 + u π u, φ Ωδ \Ω δ0 + u π u, φ Ωδ0 = I 1 + I 2 + I 3 6.7 Term I 1. Using Caucy-Scwarz in te tangent direction and Hölders inequality in te normal direction we ave I = u π u, φ Ω\Ωδ 6.8 δ sup u π u Ωs φ Ωs ds 6.9 0 s δ 0 1/2 δ 1/2 δ sup u π u Ωs ds φ 2 Ω s ds 6.10 0 s δ 0 0 sup u π u Ωs δ 1/2 φ Ω\Ωδ 6.11 0 s δ Since δ = C we may employ Proposition 5.1 as follows δ φ 2 Ω\Ω δ φ 2 Ω\Ω δ φ 2 Ω ψ 2 Ω 6.12 12
Using te interpolation error estimate 5.18 we get te estimate we get I ψ Ω 6.13 Term I 2. Proceeding in te same way as for Term I and observing tat ρ δ x = s δ, x Ω s 6.14 II = u π u, φ Ωδ \Ω δ 6.15 δ0 sup u π u Ωs φ Ωs ds 6.16 δ s δ 0 δ sup u π u Ωs 6.17 δ s δ 0 1/2 δ0 1/2 δ0 s δ 1 ds s δ φ 2 Ω s ds δ δ ln δ 1/2 φ ρδ,ω\ω δ 6.18 ln δ 1/2 ψ Ω 6.19 were we used te interpolation error estimate 5.18 and te stability estimate in Proposition 5.1. Term I 3. Using Caucy-Scwarz we obtain I = u π u, φ Ω\Ωδ 6.20 u π u Ω\Ωδ δ 1/2 φ ρ,ω\ωδ 6.21 wic can be directly estimated using standard interpolation error estimates and te stability bound. Estimate of II. Using Caucy-Scwarz and te interpolation estimate 5.18 we obtain II β 1 u π u Ω ψ Ω ψ Ω 6.22 wic concludes te proof. Following te same line of reasoning, we now state and prove te corresponding L 2 -error estimate wen te boundary flux is approximated by te Lagrange multiplier, cf. 3.16. Referring to te variational problem 3.13, te stabilization form is supposed te following localized version of te continuity condition 3.18 u Ωδ + 1/2 n u Ω + 1/2 u Ω + 1/2 λ Ω c u, λ; v, µ v Ωδ + 1/2 n v Ω + 1/2 v Ω + 1/2 µ Ω 6.23 Tis assumptions is trivially satisfies by te stabilization form 3.20 and merely quantifies tat te region of influence of te stabilization is located on or close to te boundary. Teorem 6.2. Let Σ n be te discrete boundary flux defined 3.16 and assume te u satisfies te assumption of Proposition 5.2 and tat λ H 1 Ω. Ten te following error estimate olds σ n Σ n Ω ln 6.24 Proof. Starting from te error representation formula 4.13, we need to estimate I = A π u u, π λ λ; φ, θ m ψ, λ π λ sup, II = sup, ψ L 2 Ω\0 ψ Ω ψ L 2 Ω\0 ψ Ω 13
By definition, A π u u, π λ λ; φ, θ = π u u, v Ω + π λ λ; φ Ω + θ, π u u Ω c π λ λ, π u u; φ, θ Since te estimate for first term as already been derived in te previous proof, it remains to bound te contribution from te boundary terms and te stabilization form. An application of te interpolation estimates and te discrete energy stability 5.20 yields π λ λ; φ Ω λ 1, Ω ψ Ω θ, π u u Ω θ Ω 1 π u u Ω ψ Ω Because of assumption 6.23, te contribution from te stabilization form can be estimated similarly. Finally, tanks to an interpolation estimate, term II trivially satisfies II λ Ω. 7. Numerical Results. We consider te elliptic model problem 2.1 2.2 on te domain Ω = [0, 1] [0, 1] R 2. To examine te convergence rate of te normal flux approximations, we employ te metod of manufactured solution and coose ux, y = cos2πx cos2πy + sin2πx sin2πy as a reference solution, g = u Ω and f = u as te corresponding boundary data and source function, respectively. As discretization scemes, we pick Nitsce s metod 3.1 and a stabilized Lagrange multiplier metod 3.13 wit te stabilization form given by 3.20. For te stabilization parameters we take α = β = 10. Te approximations for te boundary flux are ten computed on a sequences of uniform meses {T } wit mes sizes 1 4 2 k for k = 0,..., 15. Te numerical results are depicted in Figure 7.1. In te pre-asymptotic regime ranging from 0.35 to 0.1, te convergence rate of bot metods deviates significantly from te optimal slope 1.0. Consequently, te fitted slopes indicate a sligtly sub-optimal convergence rate for te Nitsce flux, wile te convergence rate for Lagrange multiplier metod is iger ten te teoretical prediction. If we discard te pre-asymptotic regime as sown in te rigt plot of Figure 7.1, te approximation error σ n Σ Ω exibits optimal convergence rate for bot metods and corroborates te teoretical findings of our work. 14
10 1 10 0 σ n Σ n 0, Ω 10-1 10-2 10-2 10-1 max A: 0.96 B: 1.12 10 0 σ n Σ n 0, Ω 10-1 10-2 A: 0.99 B: 1.00 10-2 10-1 max Fig. 7.1. L 2 Ω convergence study for various flux computations. A Nitsce flux for CG1 elements. B Lagrange multiplier computed wit te stabilized metod by Barbosa and Huges based on a CG1 DG0 discretization. Te legend gives te fitted slope for eac approximation error. Left Approximation error for te entire mes sequence revealing different beavior in te pre-asymptotic regime. Rigt Asymptotic regime. Starting from 0.1 bot metods give optimal first order convergence. 15
Acknowledgments. Tis work is supported by a Center of Excellence grant from te Researc Council of Norway to te Center for Biomedical Computing at Simula Researc Laboratory. References. [1] I. Babuška. Te finite element metod wit Lagrangian multipliers. Num. Mat., 203: 179 192, June 1973. [2] H.J.C. Barbosa and T.J.R. Huges. Te finite element metod wit Lagrange multipliers on te boundary: circumventing te Babuška-Brezzi condition. Computer Metods in Applied Mecanics and Engineering, 851:109 128, 1991. [3] H.J.C. Barbosa and T.J.R. Huges. Boundary Lagrange multipliers in finite element metods: error analysis in natural norms. Numer. Mat., 621:1 15, 1992. [4] J.H. Bramble. Te Lagrange multiplier metod for Diriclet s problem. Mat. Comput., 37 155:1 11, 1981. [5] F. Brezzi. On te Existence, Uniqueness and Approximation of Saddle-Point Problems Arising from Lagrangian Multipliers. RAIRO Anal. Numér., R 2:129 151, 1974. [6] Erik Burman. Projection stabilization of Lagrange multipliers for te imposition of constraints on interfaces and boundaries. Numerical Metods for Partial Differential Equations, pages n/a n/a, 2013. [7] G.F. Carey, S.S. Cow, and M.K. Seager. Approximate boundary-flux calculations. Computer Metods in Applied Mecanics and Engineering, 502:107 120, 1985. [8] J. Cabrowski. Note on te Diriclet problem wit L2-boundary data. Manuscripta Mat., 10840:91 108, 1982. [9] J. Cabrowski. Te Diriclet Problem wit L2-Boundary Data for Elliptic Linear Equations, volume 1482 of Lecture Notes in Matematics. Springer, 1991. [10] D. Estep, S. Tavener, and T. Wildey. A posteriori error estimation and adaptive mes refinement for a multiscale operator decomposition approac to fluid solid eat transfer. Journal of Computational Pysics, 22911:4143 4158, 2010. [11] D. Gilbard and N.S. Trudinger. Elliptic partial differential equations of second order, volume 224 of Classics in Matematics. Springer, 2001. [12] M. Giles, M.G. Larson, M. Levenstam, and E. Süli. Adaptive error control for finite element approximations of te lift and drag coefficients in viscous flow. Tecnical report, Te Matematical Institute, University of Oxford, 1997. [13] A. Hansbo and P. Hansbo. An unfitted finite element metod, based on Nitsce s metod, for elliptic interface problems. Comput. Metods Appl. Mec. Engrg., 19147-48:5537 5552, 2002. [14] P. Hansbo. Nitsce s metod for interface problems in computational mecanics. GAMM- Mitt, 282:183 206, 2005. [15] J.M. Melenk and B. Wolmut. Quasi-optimal approximation of surface based Lagrange multipliers in finite element metods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 504:2064 2087, 2012. [16] J. Nitsce. Über ein Variationsprinzip zur Lösung von Diriclet-Problemen bei Verwendung von Teilräumen, die keinen Randbedingungen unterworfen sind. Abandlungen aus dem Matematiscen Seminar der Universität Hamburg, 361:9 15, July 1971. [17] A.I. Pelivanov, R.D. Lazarov, G.F. Carey, and S.S. Cow. Superconvergence analysis of approximate boundary-flux calculations. Numerisce Matematik, 631:483 501, 1992. [18] J. Pitkäranta. Boundary subspaces for te finite element metod wit Lagrange multipliers. Numer. Mat., 28933:273 289, 1979. [19] J. Pitkäranta. Local stability conditions for te Babuška metod of Lagrange multipliers. Mat. Comp., 35152:1113 1129, 1980. [20] R. Rannacer and R. Scott. Some optimal error estimates for piecewise linear finite element approximations. Mat. Comp., 38158:437 445, 1982. [21] R. Scott and S. Zang. Finite element interpolation of nonsmoot functions satisfying boundary conditions. Mat. Comp., 54190:483 493, 1990. [22] R. Stenberg. On some tecniques for approximating boundary conditions in te finite element metod. J. Comput. Appl. Mat., 631:139 148, 1995. 16