Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics

, Volume 37, Issue 5, pp 582–596 | Cite as

Numerical integration over implicitly defined domains for higher order unfitted finite element methods

Article

Abstract

The paper studies several approaches to numerical integration over a domain defined implicitly by an indicator function such as the level set function. The integration methods are based on subdivision, moment–fitting, local quasi-parametrization and Monte-Carlo techniques. As an application of these techniques, the paper addresses numerical solution of elliptic PDEs posed on domains and manifolds defined implicitly. A higher order unfitted finite element method (FEM) is assumed for the discretization. In such a method the underlying mesh is not fitted to the geometry, and hence the errors of numerical integration over curvilinear elements affect the accuracy of the finite element solution together with approximation errors. The paper studies the numerical complexity of the integration procedures and the performance of unfitted FEMs which employ these tools.

Keywords and phrases

Numerical integration unfitted finite element methods XFEM moment-fitting level set method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Abedian, J. Parvizian, A. Duester, H. Khademyzadeh, and E. Rank, “Performance of different integration schemes in facing discontinuities in the finite cell method,” International Journal of Computational Methods 10 (3), 1350002 (2013).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Agouzal and Yu. Vassilevski, “On a discreteHessian recovery for P1 finite elements,” Journal of Numerical Mathematics 10, 1–12 (2002).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Barrett and C. Elliott, “A practical finite element approximation of a semi-definite Neumann problem on a curved domain,” NumerischeMathematik 51 (1), 23–36 (1987).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Belytschko and T. Black, “Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal remeshing,” International Journal for NumericalMethods in Engineering 45 (5), 601–620 (1999).CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. Burman, S. Claus, P. Hansbo, M. Larson, and A. Massing, “Cutfem: Discretizing geometry and partial differential equations,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 104 (7), 472–501 (2015).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Burman and P. Hansbo, “Fictitious domain finite element methods using cut elements: II. A stabilized Nitsche method,” Applied Numerical Mathematics 62 (4), 328–341 (2012).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Burman, P. Hansbo, and M. Larson, “Astabilized cut finite elementmethod for partial differential equations on surfaces: The Laplace–Beltrami operator,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 285, 188–207 (2015).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Dréau, N. Chevaugeon, and N. Moës, “Studied X-FEM enrichment to handle material interfaces with higher order finite element,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 199 (29), 1922–1936 (2010).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Fries and T. Belytschko, “The extended/generalized finite element method: an overview of the method and its applications,” International Journal for NumericalMethods in Engineering 84 (3), 253–304 (2010).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Fries and S. Omerovic, “Higher-order accurate integration of implicit geometries,” International Journal for NumericalMethods in Engineering (2015).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Grande and A. Reusken, “A higher-order finite element method for partial differential equations on surfaces,” Preprint 401 (2014).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Gross, M. Olshanskii, and A. Reusken, “A trace finite elementmethod for a class of coupled bulk-interface transport problems,” ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 49, 1303–1330 (2015).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Holdych, D. Noble, and R. Secor, “Quadrature rules for triangular and tetrahedral elements with generalized functions,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 73 (9), 1310–1327 (2008).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Hughes, J. Cottrell, and Y. Bazilevs, “Isogeometric analysis: CAD, finite elements, NURBS, exact geometry andmesh refinement,” Computer Methods inAppliedMechanics and Engineering 194 (39), 4135–4195 (2005).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Min and F. Gibou, “Geometric integration over irregular domains with application to level-set methods,” Journal of Computational Physics 226 (2), 1432–1443 (2007).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Mittal and G. Iaccarino, “Immersed boundary methods,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 37, 239–261 (2005).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Moumnassi, S. Belouettar, E. Bećhet, S. Bordas, D. Quoirin, and M. Potier-Ferry, “Finite element analysis on implicitly defined domains: An accurate representation based on arbitrary parametric surfaces,” Computer Methods in AppliedMechanics and Engineering 200 (5), 774–796 (2011).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Müller, F. Kummer, and M. Oberlack, “Highly accurate surface and volume integration on implicit domains by means of moment-fitting,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 96 (8), 512–528 (2013).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Olshanskii, A. Reusken, and J. Grande, “A finite element method for elliptic equations on surfaces,” SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 47 (5), 3339–3358 (2009).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Olshanskii and D. Safin, “A narrow-band unfitted finite element method for elliptic PDEs posed on surfaces,” Mathematics of Computation 85, 1549–1570 (2016).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Saye, “High-order quadrature methods for implicitly defined surfaces and volumes in hyperrectangles,” SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 37 (2), A993–A1019 (2015).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Tornberg, “Multi-dimensional quadrature of singular and discontinuous functions,” BIT Numerical Mathematics 42 (3), 644–669 (2002).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Vallet, C. Manole, J. Dompierre, S. Dufour, and F. Guibault, “Numerical comparison of some Hessian recovery techniques,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 72 (8), 987–1007 (2007).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations