Advertisement

CFD Newton Solvers with EliAD: An Elimination Automatic Differentiation Tool

  • Shaun A. Forth
  • Mohamed Tadjouddine
Conference paper
  • 327 Downloads

Abstract

We present a matrix interpretation of standard forward and reverse modes of automatic differentiation (AD) in terms of forward- and back-substitution of the extended Jacobian system. We then show how efficiency improvements for Jacobian calculation are achieved by performing Gaussian elimination on the extended Jacobian. We introduce the ELIAD tool, developed to enable such elimination AD and present results demonstrating significant run-time improvements both for individual finite-volume flux Jacobian calculations and for a 2-D parabolised Navier-Stokes (PNS) flow solver.

Keywords

Laminar Boundary Layer Automatic Differentiation Fortran Subroutine Viscous Flux Inviscid Flux 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    CH. Bischof, A. Carle, P.D. Hovland, P. Khademi, and A. Mauer: ‘ADIFOR 2.0 User’s Guide (Revision D)’. Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Rice University, Technical Memorandum no. 192 (1998). Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Giering: ‘Tangent Linear and Adjoint Model Compiler, Users Manual’. Center for Global Change Sciences, Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Science, (MIT, Cambridge, MA,1997). Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Griewank: Evaluating Derivatives: Principles and Techniques of Algorithmic Differentiation (SIAM, Philadelphia 2000).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Griewank and S. Reese: ‘On the calculation of Jacobian matrices by the Markowitz rule’. In: Automatic Differentiation of Algorithms: Theory, Implementation, and Application, ed. by A. Griewank, G. F. Corliss (SIAM, Philadelphia, 1991) pp. 126–135.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P.D. Hovland, L.C. Mclnnes: Parallel Computing 27, 4 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    U. Naumann: Efficient Calculation of Jacobian Matrices by Optimized Application of the Chain Rule to Computational Graphs. PhD Thesis, Technical University of Dresden (1999).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P.L. Roe: Journal of Computational Physics 43 (1981).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Tadjouddine, S.A. Forth, J.D. Pryce: ‘AD Tools and Prospects for Optimal AD in CFD Flux Jacobian Calculations’. In Automatic Differentiation: From Simulation to Optimization. ed. by. G. Corliss, C. Faure, A. Griewank, L. Hascoët, U. Naumann (Springer, New York 2001) pp. 247–252.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Tadjouddine, S.A. Forth, J.D. Pryce, J.K. Reid. ‘Performance Issues for Vertex Elimination Methods in Computing Jacobians using Automatic Differentiation’. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computational Science, Volume 2. ed. by P.M. Sloot (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Amsterdam, 2002) pp. 1077–1086.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K.J. Vanden and P.D. Orkwis: AIAA Journal 34, 6 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Venkatakrishnan: AIAA Journal 27, 7 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Y.C. Vigneron, J.V. Rakich, and J.C. Tannehill: ‘Calculation of Supersonic Viscous Flow over Delta Wings with Sharp Subsonic Leading Edges’. AIAA Paper 78–1137 (1978). Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shaun A. Forth
    • 1
  • Mohamed Tadjouddine
    • 1
  1. 1.Applied Mathematics & Operational Research GroupCranfield University (RMCS Shrivenham)SwindonUK

Personalised recommendations