Abstract
The multimesh finite element method enables the solution of partial differential equations on a computational mesh composed by multiple arbitrarily overlapping meshes. The discretization is based on a continuous–discontinuous function space with interface conditions enforced by means of Nitsche’s method. In this contribution, we consider the Stokes problem as a first step towards flow applications. The multimesh formulation leads to so called cut elements in the underlying meshes close to overlaps. These demand stabilization to ensure coercivity and stability of the stiffness matrix. We employ a consistent least-squares term on the overlap to ensure that the inf-sup condition holds. We here present the method for the Stokes problem, discuss the implementation, and verify that we have optimal convergence.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Consider the Stokes problem
for the velocity \(\boldsymbol {u} : \varOmega \rightarrow \mathbb {R}^d\) and pressure \(\boldsymbol {p} : \varOmega \rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) in a polytopic domain \(\varOmega \subset \mathbb {R}^d\), d = 2, 3.
The Stokes problem is considered here as a first step towards a multimesh formulation for multi-body flow problems, and ultimately fluid–structure interaction problems, in which each body is discretized by an individual boundary-fitted mesh and the boundary-fitted meshes move freely on top of a fixed background mesh. The applications for such a formulation are many, e.g., the simulation of blood platelets in a blood stream, the optimization of the configuration of an array of wind turbines, or the investigation of the effect of building locations in a simulation of urban wind conditions and pollution. Common to these applications is that the multimesh method removes the need for costly mesh (re)generation and allows the platelets, wind turbines or buildings to be moved around freely in the domain, either in each timestep as a part of a dynamic simulation, or in each iteration as part of an optimization problem.
The multimesh formulation presented here is a generalization of the formulation presented and analyzed in [5] for two domains. For comparison, the multimesh discretization of the Poisson problem for arbitrarily many intersecting meshes is presented in [6] and analyzed in [8].
2 Notation
We first review the notation for domains, interfaces, meshes and overlaps used to formulate the multimesh finite element method. For a more detailed exposition, we refer to [6].
Remark 1
To simplify the presentation, the domains Ω 1, …, Ω N are not allowed to intersect the boundary of Ω.
3 Multimesh Finite Element Method
To formulate the multimesh finite element for the Stokes problem (1) and (2), we assume for each (active) mesh \(\mathcal {K}_{h,i}\) the existence of a pair of inf-sub stable spaces V h,i × Q h,i, i = 0, 1, …, N, away from the interface. To be precise, we assume inf-sup stability in ω h,i ⊂ Ω h,i in the sense of (5) below, where ω h,i is close to Ω i in the sense that Ω h,i ∖ ω h,i ⊂ U δ(Γ i), where
and B δ(x) is a ball of radius δ centered at x. In other words, U δ(Γ i) is the tubular neighborhood of Γ with thickness δ. In the numerical examples, we let ω h,i be the union of elements in \(\mathcal {K}_{h,i}\) with empty intersection with Γ ij, j > i.
The inf-sup condition may expressed on each submesh ω h,i by
where \(p_i = p|{ }_{\varOmega _{h,i}}\), \(\lambda _{\omega _{h,i}}(p)\) is the average of p over ω h,i and W h,i is the subspace of V h,i defined by
We now define the multimesh finite element space as the direct sum
where V h and Q h consist of piecewise polynomial of degree k and l, respectively. This means that an element v ∈V h is a tuple (v 0, …, v N), and the inclusion V h↪L 2(Ω) is defined by v(x) = v i(x) for x ∈ Ω i. A similar interpretation is done for q ∈ Q h. We consider here Taylor-Hood elements [3] with k ≥ 2, l = k − 1, for which the condition (5) is fulfilled, but non-conforming elements are also possible.
We now consider the following asymmetric finite element method: Find (u h, p h) ∈V h × Q h such that A h((u h, p h), (v, q)) = l h(v) for all (v, q) ∈V h × Q h, where
Here, β 0 and β 1 are stabilization parameters that must be sufficiently large to ensure that the bilinear form A h is coercive; cf. [5] for an analysis of the two-domain case.
For simplicity, we use the global mesh size h here and throughout the presentation. If the meshes are of substantially different sizes, it may be beneficial to introduce the individual mesh sizes h i in (12) and the average \(h_i^{-1} + h_j^{-1}\) in (9).
Note that since Γ i is partitioned into interfaces Γ ij relative to underlying meshes, the sums of the interface terms are over 0 ≤ j < i ≤ N. In contrast, the sums of the overlap terms are over 0 ≤ i < j ≤ N since the overlap \(\mathcal {O}_i\) is partitioned into overlaps \(\mathcal {O}_{ij}\) relative to overlapping meshes.
The jump terms on \(\mathcal {O}_{ij}\) and Γ ij are defined by [v] = v i −v j, where v i and v j are the finite element solutions (components) on the active meshes \(\mathcal {K}_{h,i}\) and \(\mathcal {K}_{h,j}\). The average normal flux is defined on Γ ij by
Here, any convex combination is valid [4].
The proposed formulation (8) is identical to the one proposed in [5] with sums over all domains and interfaces. Also note the similarity with the multimesh formulation for the Poisson problem presented in [6], the difference being the additional least-squares term d h (and the corresponding term in l h) since we only assume inf-sup stability in ω h,i, see (5) and the discussion above. If we do not assume inf-sup stability anywhere (e.g. if we would use a velocity-pressure element of equal order), the least-squares term should be applied over the whole domain as in [10]. Please cf. [10] for the use of a symmetric d h.
Other stabilization terms may be considered. By norm equivalence, the stabilization term s h(u, v) may alternatively be formulated as
where β 2 is a stabilization parameter; see [8].
Note that the finite element method weakly approximates continuity in the sense that [u h] = 0 and [n i ⋅∇u h] = 0 on all interfaces.
4 Implementation
We have implemented the multimesh finite element method as part of the software framework FEniCS [2, 9]. One of the main features of FEniCS is the form language UFL [1] which allows variational forms to be expressed in near-mathematical notation. However, to express the multimesh finite element method (8), a number of custom measures must be introduced. In particular, new measures must be introduced for integrals over cut cells, interfaces and overlaps. These measures are then mapped to quadrature rules that are computed at runtime. An overview of these algorithms and the implementation is given in [7].
To express the multimesh finite element method, we let dX denote the integration over domains Ω i, i = 0, …, N, including cut cells. Integration over Γ ij and \(\mathcal {O}_{ij}\) are expressed using the measures dI and dO, respectively. We let dC denote integration over Ω h,i ∖ ω h,i. Now the multimesh finite element method for the Stokes problem may be expressed as
a_h = inner(grad(u), grad(v))*dX \ - inner(avg(grad(u)), tensor_jump(v, n))*dI \ - inner(avg(grad(v)), tensor_jump(u, n))*dI \ + beta_0/h * inner(jump(u), jump(v))*dI s_h = beta_1 * inner(jump(grad(u)), jump(grad(v)))*dO b_h = lambda v, q: inner(-div(v), q)*dX \ + inner(jump(v, n), avg(q))*dI d_h = delta*h**2 * inner(-div(grad(u)) + grad(p), \ -div(grad(v)) - grad(q))*dC
This makes it easy to implement the somewhat lengthy form (8), as well as investigate the effect of different stabilization terms.
5 Numerical Results
To investigate the convergence of the multimesh finite element method, we solve the Stokes problem in the unit square with the following exact solution
and corresponding right hand side. We use P kP k−1 Taylor–Hood elements with k ∈{2, 3, 4} and we use N ∈{1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32} randomly placed domains as in [6] (see Fig. 6). Due to the random placement of domains, some domains are completely hidden and will not contribute to the solution. For N = 8, this is the case for one domain, for N = 16, three domains and for N = 32, four domains are completely hidden. This is automatically handled by the computational geometry routines. Convergence results are presented in Fig. 7 as well as in Table 1.
6 Discussion
The results presented in Table 1 and Fig. 7 show the expected order of convergence for the velocity in the L 2(Ω) norm (k + 1), for the velocity in the \(H^1_0(\varOmega )\) norm (k), and for the pressure in the L 2(Ω) norm (k).
A detailed inspection of Fig. 7 reveals that, as expected, the multimesh discretization yields larger errors than the single mesh discretization (standard Taylor–Hood on one single mesh). The errors introduced by the multimesh discretization are one to two orders of magnitude larger than the single mesh error. However, the convergence rate is optimal and it should be noted that the results presented here are for an extreme scenario where a large number of meshes are simultaneously overlapping; see Fig. 6. For a normal application, such as the simulation of flow around a collection of objects, each object would be embedded in a boundary-fitted mesh and only a small number of meshes would simultaneously overlap (in addition to each mesh overlapping the fixed background mesh), corresponding to the situation when two or more objects are close.
The presented method and implementation demonstrate the viability of the multimesh method as an attractive alternative to existing methods for discretization of PDEs on domains undergoing large deformations. In particular, the discretization and the implementation are robust to thin intersections and rounding errors, both of which are bound to appear in a simulation involving a large number of meshes, timesteps or configurations.
References
Alnæs, M.S., Logg, A., Oelgaard, K.B., Rognes, M.E., Wells, G.N.: Unified form language: a domain-specific language for weak formulations of partial differential equations. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 40 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2566630
Alnæs, M.S., Blechta, J., Hake, J., Johansson, A., Kehlet, B., Logg, A., Richardson, C., Ring, J., Rognes, M.E., Wells, G.N.: The FEniCS project version 1.5. Arch. Numer. Softw. 3(100) (2015). https://doi.org/10.11588/ans.2015.100.20553
Brenner, S.C., Scott, L.R.: The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods. Springer, New York (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75934-0
Hansbo, A., Hansbo, P., Larson, M.G.: A finite element method on composite grids based on Nitsche’s method. ESAIM-Math. Model. Num. 37(3), 495–514 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an:2003039
Johansson, A., Larson, M.G., Logg, A.: High order cut finite element methods for the Stokes problem. Adv. Model. Simul. Eng. Sci. 2(1), 1–23 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40323-015-0043-7
Johansson, A., Kehlet, B., Larson, M.G., Logg, A.: MultiMesh finite element methods: solving PDEs on multiple intersecting meshes. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 343, 672–689 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.09.009
Johansson, A., Kehlet, B., Logg, A.: Construction of quadrature rules on general polygonal and polyhedral domains in cut finite element methods (in preparation, 2018)
Johansson, A., Larson, M.G., Logg, A.: MultiMesh finite elements with flexible mesh sizes. Submitted to CMAME (2019). arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06455
Logg, A., Mardal, K.A., Wells, G.N., et al.: Automated Solution of Differential Equations by the Finite Element Method. Springer, Berlin (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23099-8
Massing, A., Larson, M.G., Logg, A., Rognes, M.E.: A stabilized Nitsche overlapping mesh method for the Stokes problem. Numer. Math. 1–29 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00211-013-0603-z
Acknowledgements
August Johansson was supported by the Research Council of Norway through the FRIPRO Program at Simula Research Laboratory, project number 25123. Mats G. Larson was supported in part by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research Grant No. AM13-0029, the Swedish Research Council Grants Nos. 2013-4708, 2017-03911, and the Swedish Research Programme Essence. Anders Logg was supported by the Swedish Research Council Grant No. 2014-6093.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Johansson, A., Larson, M.G., Logg, A. (2020). A Multimesh Finite Element Method for the Stokes Problem. In: van Brummelen, H., Corsini, A., Perotto, S., Rozza, G. (eds) Numerical Methods for Flows. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, vol 132. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30705-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30705-9_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-30704-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-30705-9
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)