Petrov-Galerkin Schemes for the Steady State Convection-Diffusion Equation

  • M. Ahués
  • M. Telias
Conference paper

Abstract

It is well known that the main trouble in convection dominated problems is that Galerkin and Central Finite Differences schemes often give spurious oscillations which arise specially when there are downwind boundary conditions. This is due to the fact that the differential operators involved in the mathematical model are not symmetric and the matrix of the linear system which arises from discretization does not verify the discrete maximum principle.

Keywords

Convection Advection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahués, M. and Telias, M. (1981). A Finite Element Method for the Steady State Convection Diffusion Equation. Rapport de Recherche IMAG n° 278. Grenoble, France.Google Scholar
  2. Axelsson, 0. (1980). On the Numerical Solution of Convection Diffusion Equations. Lecture Notes E.P.F.L. Switzerland.Google Scholar
  3. Brooks, A. and Hughes, T.J.R. (1980). StreamlineUpwind/Petrov-Galerkin Methods for Advection Dominated Flows. 3rd. International Conference on F.E.M. in Flow Problems. Canada, 283–292.Google Scholar
  4. Chatelin, F. (1982). Spectral Approximation of Linear Operators. Academic Press. U.S.A. (to appear).Google Scholar
  5. Christie, I., Griffiths, D.F., Mitchell, A.R. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1976). Finite Element Methods for Second Order Differential Equations with Significant First Derivatives. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering. 31: 1389–1396.Google Scholar
  6. Christie, I. and Mitchell, A.R. (1978). Upwind of High Order Galerkin Methods in Conduction-Convection Problems. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 12: 1764–1771.Google Scholar
  7. Griffiths, D.F. and Mitchell, A.R. (1979). On Generating Upwind Finite Element Methods. F.E.M. for Convection Dominated Flows. ASME. U.S.A. 91–104.Google Scholar
  8. Heinrich J.C., Huyarkorn, P.S., Mitchell, A.R. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1977). An Upwind Finite Element Scheme for Two Dimensional Convective Transport Equation. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering. 11: 131–143.Google Scholar
  9. Heinrich, J.C. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1979). The Finite Element Mehod and Upwinding Techniques in the Numerical Solution of Convection Dominated Flow Problems. F.E.M. for Convection Dominated Flows. ASME. U.S.A. 105–136.Google Scholar
  10. Hughes, T.J.R. and Brooks, A. (1979). A Multidimensional Upwind Scheme with No Crosswind Diffusion. F.E.M. for Convection Dominated Flows. ASME. U.S.A. 19–35.Google Scholar
  11. Kellog, R.B. and Tsan, A. (1978). Analysis of Some Difference Approximations for a Singular Perturbation Problem without Turning Points. Mathematics for Computation 32, 144: 1025–1039.Google Scholar
  12. Leonard, B.P. (1979). A Survey of Finite Differences of Opinion on Numerical Muddling of the Incomprehensible Defective Confusion Equation. F.E.M. for Convection Dominated Flows. ASME. U.S.A. 1–18.Google Scholar
  13. Roache, P.J. (1976). Computational Fluid Dynamics. Hermosa Publishers. U.S.A.Google Scholar
  14. Thomasset, F. (1981). Finite Element Methods for Navier Stokes Equations. Cours INRIA. France. 1–125.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Varga, R. (1962). Matrix Iterative Analysis. Prentice Hall Series in Automatic Computation. U.S.A.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Ahués
    • 1
  • M. Telias
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire IMAGGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations