• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Chapter 5. Basics of Higher-order Discretization Methods

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2024

Membagikan "Chapter 5. Basics of Higher-order Discretization Methods"

Copied!
11
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

Chapter 5. Basics of Higher-order Discretization Methods

(2)

Chap. 5-1. Comparison of Discretization Methods_Revisited

Discretization Methods Available

FDM (Finite Difference Method)

Direct discretization of the differential form by assuming point-wise values defined at each grid point

Simple, efficient and easy to discretize

One-dimensional (or dimension-by-dimension) interpolation and transformation to computational coordinate are essential.  not suitable to complex geometry

FVM (Finite Volume Method)

Integration of the differential form of conservation laws over finite computational cell

Apply control volume analysis to each computational cell defined by (∆x, ∆t) using cell- averaged quantities.

, at with ( ),

( ) 0 j j j 0 plus a suitable time-discretization

jq j q

q f x x j q

h x t

dq c f q f q

t x dt h

 

      

 

   

1/2 1/2

integration discretized form using

over ( , ) cell-averaged quantities

1

1 2 1 2 1 1

( ) ( )

0 0

,..., ,...,

n j

n j

t t x

h t t x

n n n n

n n

j j p j q j j p j q

j j

q f q q f q

t x t x dxdt

F q q F q q

q q

t



   

         

 

 

 

     

1 2 1 2

1

1 2 1 2

0 or ( ,..., )

1 1

with , , ,

j n j n

j n n

j p j q

x n n t t

j j j

x t

dq L q q

h dt

q x t dx q f q x t dt F

x t

 



 

 

(3)

Chap. 5-1. Comparison of Discretization Methods_Revisited

FVM (Finite Volume Method) (cont’d)

Purely local analysis without assuming any grid structure or the shape of computational cell

 suitable to complex geometry

Cell-wise interpolation for high-order accuracy  not flexible on general unstructured grids

FEM (Finite Element Method)

Weak formulation (or weighted-residual formulation) from the differential form of conservation laws over each computational element

Local expansion of solution using basis functions followed by orthogonal projection of the residual (or error) to test function space

Local formulation without assuming any grid structure or the shape of computational cell  suitable to complex geometry

Local expansion of solution with multiple DOFS  flexible for higher-order approximation on general unstructured grids

Uncertainty on conservative and accurate treatment of the boundary integral

 ... 0

( ) ( )

1

( ) 0 0 on for , 1 ( )

approximate ( , ) on using basis functions, ( , ) ( ) ( ) evaluate temporal and

Tk i

k k k

dx i

i i k i

T T T

ndof n i

k k i

i

q f q d

q dx f dx f dx T i ndof n

t x t dx

q x t T q x t q t x

   

          

  

 

  

spatial integral terms by numerical quadrature

(4)

Chap. 5-1. Comparison of Discretization Methods_Revisited

Value of high-order accuracy

Ex) Behavior of computed solutions by changing order-of-polynomial approximation(N) mesh size(K)

0

1 1 1

1 2

2

0 with [0, 2 ], 2 , ( ) ( ,0) sin(2 )

- With periodic BC and a fixed time step for all cases, computed results shows i) h ( N ) ( ) N ( ) N with = targ

q q

a x a q x q x x

t x

q q O h C T h c c T h T

  

        

 

   

2

et time

ii) computational cost ( ) ( 1) with 2 , = order-of-approximation - Comparison of computed results reveals that higer-order approximation is beneficial for the cases requi

C T K N h N

K

   

ring i) highly accurate solutions, ii) long-time integrations

< Scaled computation cost >

N \ K 2 4 8 16 32 64

1 1.00 2.19 3.50 8.13 19.6 54.3

2 2.00 3.75 7.31 15.3 38.4 110.

4 4.88 8.94 20.0 45.0 115. 327.

8 15.1 32.0 68.3 163. 665. 1271.

16 57.8 121. 279. 664. 1958. 5256.

(~ O(h ) with n > 2)n

(5)

Strategy for High-Order Accuracy

One unknown (or one DOF) per one cell approach

Within a cell , approximate the exact solution as a polynomial by using Taylor expansion with neighboring computational cells (or grid points)

nth-order polynomial approximation within

FDM: direct Taylor expansion, compact difference

FVM: TVD-MUSCL, ENO/WENO, MLP reconstruction

Cell-interface values estimated from are used to evaluate a numerical flux.

+ Relatively simple, easy to understand, and suitable for coding

- Non-local computational stencil

As a result, when is higher than linear polynomial,

Hard to treat boundary conditions, hard to handle 3-D complex geometry, and hard to exploit parallel computations

Multiple DOFs per one cell approach

Within an element , approximate the exact solution as a polynomial by a linear combination of local shape functions (or basis functions).

Chap. 5-1. Comparison of Discretization Methods_Revisited

 

1 1 1 2 1 2

1

( , , , , ) , with

n l

k k l j a j a j b j b k k

l

q x q c q q   q   q x x x x a b n

 

   

Tk q x( ) q xk( )

Tk

k( ) q x

k( ) q x

Tk

Tk q x( ) q xkh( )

(6)

 

1 ( ) 1 2 1 2 1

( ),

h n l

k k l k k

l

q x q

x x x x

 

Chap. 5-1. Comparison of Discretization Methods_Revisited

Multiple DOFs per one cell approach (cont’d)

nth-order polynomial approximation within

Each coefficient is regarded as an unknown or a degree of freedom (DOF).

Finite element discretization based on weighted residual formulation is commonly adopted to determine the evolution of .

+ Highly local construction  compact stencil As a result,

Only nearest elements sharing a common cell interface/vertex are necessary → amenable to parallel computation

Easy to implement boundary conditions

Easier to tackle 3-D complex geometry

- More mathematical background and more efforts to implement it into a code

- More delicate numerical treatment for temporal and spatial integral terms

- More data storage and/or more computational costs in general

 Overcome via computational techniques such as parallel computing or h/padaptation Tk

( )l

qk

( )l

qk

Tk

(7)

Discretization of 1-D SCL,

Weighted residual formulation

Approximate solution of within the cell

Choice of the polynomial space and basis function determines the nature of solution.

Approximate solution does not satisfy the governing equation exactly.

Minimize the residual, R,in the weighted integral sense over the test function space

Choice of the weight function determines the nature of the discretized equation.

Discrete Fourier spectral method:

Galerkin approximation:

Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) Method

Integration-by-parts over the cell with a compactly supported

 a weak form:

Chap. 5-2. Basic Formulation

t x

q + f (q) = 0

( ) ik xˆj

w xj e ( ) ( )

i i

w x x

( ) ( )

1

( , ) kh( , ) ndof n kl ( ) ( ), where { }l l n and ( ) dim( )n 1

l

q x t q x t q t  x  V ndof n V n

   

1 1 ( )

( ) ( ) 0 over the whole domain elem for weighted functions { ( )}

k

N h

k i i i i i ndof n

T R q w x  D T w x  

( ) ( )

Non-zero residual: 0 ( )

h h h

k k k h

k

q f q q f q

t x t x R q

        

   

 

( ) ( ) 0 ( ) 0

ˆ 0

k k k k

k k k

i t x i t i x i

T T T T

i

i i

T T T

R q w x q f q dx q dx f dx

q dx f n dx f dx

t x

  

 

     

 

   

 

   

  

( , )

q x t Tk [xk1/2,xk1/2]

Vn  l

( , )

h

q x tk

wi

T

k

i

( ) x

(8)

DG approach to treat the boundary integral

Approximate solution allows to be discontinuous, in the sense of , at the cell interface .

→ f is not uniquely determined at the cell interface.

If , Thus, the weak form becomes or the finite volume discretization. → In order to maintain conservation at , f is

approximated by a conservative numerical flux H from finite volume method.

Spatial approximations

Chap. 5-2. Basic Formulation

i 1

- : the value of at the boundary obtained from ( ) of the cell

: the value of at the boundary obtained from ( ) of the adjacent ce

( , ) 0 with

k k k

k k

k

i

i i

T T T

q q T q x T

q q T q x

q dx H q q dx f dx

t x

  

    

  

ll sharing Tk

( ) ( )

1 ( ) ( )

1

( , ) ( ) 0

( ) ( , ) ( ) 0

( ) ( , )

k k k

k k k

k k

h h h h h h i

k i k k k i k k

T T T

ndof n

l h h h h h i

k l i k k k i k k

T T T

l ndof n

l h h h

k T l i T k k k i

l

q dx H q q dx f q dx

t x

q t dx H q q dx f q dx

t x

q t dx H q q dx

t

  

   

 

    

 

   

       

  

    

  

   

  

 

( )

( )

1

( ) 0

Thus, we have ( , ) ( ) 0.

k

k k k

h h i

k k

T ndof n l

h h h h h

k i

i l k k k i k k

T T T

l

f q dx x

dx q H q q dx f q dx

t x



 

  

    

 

   

Tk

Tk

C0

( ) ( ) (1)

1

( , ) ndof n ( ) ( ) ( ).

h l

k k l k

l

q x t q t f x q t

dqk(1) f k 1/2 0

dt 

(9)

Semi-discrete form with a matrix-vector notation

Strong form by taking integration-by-parts once more

Weighted residual is dependent on the choice of numerical flux H and test function

Smoothness of is not essential.

Various approaches to remove the boundary integral term

Collocation penalty approach, using Dirac delta functions

Choice of Basis Function

Classification of polynomial basis functions

(Option 1) Modal basis function to represent a specific solution distribution (or mode shape)

Solution of a singular Sturm-Liouville problem

Chap. 5-2. Basic Formulation

( ) ( )

i x x yi

 

( )

( ) ( )

( ) ( )

( , ) ( ) ,

where , ( ) , and ( )

k k

k

h h h h h

k

k T k k k T k k

j

k T i j ndof n ndof n k k ndof n i ndof n

d H q q dx f q dx

dt x

dx q t x

 

   

 

      

 

q Φ

M Φ

M q Φ

0

or ( , )

k k k k k

k k

h h

h h

i k k

i i i k k i

T T T T T

h

h h h h

k k

k T T k k k k

q f

q dx H dx f dx dx f H dx

t x t x

d f

dx f H q q dx

dt x

  

             

     

     

    

 

M q Φ Φ

i

i

2 2

2

( ) ( )

(1 )d n x 2 d n x ( 1) ( ) 0 for n [ 1,1], 0

x x n n x x n

dx dx

  

       

(10)

Legendre polynomial( ) is a special case of the Jacobi polynomial( ) which is a solution of the general singular Sturm-Liouville problem.

Chap. 5-2. Basic Formulation

2

2 3 4 2

0 1 2 3 4

( ) 1 [( 1) ] (Rodrigues' formula) gives a sequence of -order Legendre ploynomials 2 !

1 1 1

as ( ) 1, ( ) , ( ) (3 1), ( ) (5 3 ), ( ) (35 30 3),...

2 2 8

Notable prop

n

n th

n n n

x d x n

n dx

x x x x x x x x x x x

    

1 1

1 1 ( 1)

erties

- Orthogonality: 2 and 0 with (1) 1, ( ) ( 1) ( ), 0

2 1

[ ] with and / || || becomes the identity matrix.

- Recurrence:

k

n

i j ij j n n n

k ij ij T i j

dx dx x x n

i

m m dx

     

   

  

 

M  

1 1 1 1

1 -1

( 1) n ( ) (2 1) n( ) n ( ), d n ( 1) n d n , and d n d n (2 1) , n 1

n x n x x n x n x n n

dx dx dx dx

   

 

< Example of modal basis functions >

(Legendre polynomials)

< Example of nodal basis functions >

(Cubic Lagrange polynomials)

n Pn( , ) 

(11)

(Option2) Nodal basis function

Chap. 5-2. Basic Formulation

2 ( , ) ( , )

2 ( , )

2

( , )

2 ( , )

( ) ( )

(1 ) [ ( 2) ] ( 1) ( ) 0 for [ 1,1], 0,

and ( , ) 1 or (1 ) ( ) ( ) ( 1) ( ) ( ) 0 with ( ) (1 ) (1 )

n n

n

n

n

d P x dP x

x x n n P x x n

dx dx

d dP x

x w x n n w x P x w x x x

dx dx

P

   

 

 

 

     

   

        

      

( , ) 2

1 ( , ) ( , ) ( , )

1

( 1) 1

( ) [ ( )(1 ) ] (Rodrigues' formula) or a form of hypergeometric function 2 ! ( )

Notable properties

- Orthogonality: ( ) ( , , ) with ( ) ( 1)

n n

n

n n n

n

i j ij n n

x d w x x

n w x dx

P P w x dx f i P x P

 

        

  

( , )

( , ) ( , ) ( , ) ( , )

1 1 1

( , )

( 1, 1) 1

( ), 0

- Recurrence: ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) and

( 1)

with ( , , ), ( , , ), 1

2 - Jacobi po

n n n n n n n

n

n n n n n

x n

xP x a P x b P x a P x

dP n

P a a n b b n n

dx

 

       

 

     

  

(0,0)

lynomials contain other orthogonal polynomials as a special case,

and they are quite useful for Gauss-like quadratures and construction of multi-dimensional basis.

. Pn ( )x n( ) (Legendre x

( 1/2, 1/2)

polynomials)

. Pn ( )x T xn( )con n( ) with xcos , -     (Chebyshev polynomials)

( ) 1

Lagrange polynomial by interpolating some selective points - ( ) Thus, ( ) by definition.

- is not diagonalized.

- Typically employed in flux reconstruction app

ndof n

j

i i j ij

j i j

k

x x x x

x x M

  

roach such as FR/CPR, ESFR

Referensi

Dokumen terkait