A Posteriori Modelling-Discretization Error Estimate for Elliptic Problems with L∞-Coefficients

Monika Weymuth; Stefan Sauter; Sergey Repin

doi:10.1515/cmam-2017-0015

Artikel

A Posteriori Modelling-Discretization Error Estimate for Elliptic Problems with L^∞-Coefficients

Monika Weymuth , Stefan Sauter und Sergey Repin

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 21. Juni 2017

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen Erkunden Sie dieses Fachgebiet

Aus der Zeitschrift Computational Methods in Applied Mathematics Band 17 Heft 3

Abstract

We consider elliptic problems with complicated, discontinuous diffusion tensor A0. One of the standard approaches to numerically treat such problems is to simplify the coefficient by some approximation, say Aε, and to use standard finite elements. In [19] a combined modelling-discretization strategy has been proposed which estimates the discretization and modelling errors by a posteriori estimates of functional type. This strategy allows to balance these two errors in a problem adapted way. However, the estimate of the modelling error was derived under the assumption that the difference A0-Aε becomes small with respect to the L∞-norm. This implies in particular that interfaces/discontinuities separating the smooth parts of A0 have to be matched exactly by the coefficient Aε. Therefore the efficient application of that theory to problems with complicated or curved interfaces is limited. In this paper, we will present a refined theory, where the difference A0-Aε is measured in the Lq-norm for some appropriate q∈]2,∞[ and, hence, the geometric resolution condition is significantly relaxed.

Keywords: A Posteriori Error Estimation; Elliptic Regularity; Model Simplification

MSC 2010: 65N30; 65N15; 35J25

A Interpolation Estimates

Lemma A.1.

Let 2<r<t<∞ and θ∈(0,1) be such that

1r=θ2+1-θt.

Then if u∈Lt⁢(Ω), we have the estimate

(A.1)∥u∥r,Ω≤∥u∥2,Ωθ⁢∥u∥t,Ω1-θ.

A proof can be found in [1]. Note that inequality (A.1) also holds for vector-valued functions.

Theorem A.2 (Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem).

Let S be a linear mapping from Lq⁢(Ω)∩Lr⁢(Ω) into itself, 1≤q<r<∞ and suppose that there are constants S1 and S2 such that

μS⁢f⁢(t)≤(S1⁢∥f∥q,Ωt)q,μS⁢f⁢(t)≤(S2⁢∥f∥r,Ωt)r

for all f∈Lq⁢(Ω)∩Lr⁢(Ω) and t>0. Then S extends as a bounded linear mapping from Lp⁢(Ω) into itself for any p such that q<p<r and

∥S⁢f∥p,Ω≤2⁢(pp-q+pr-p)1p⁢S1α⁢S21-α⁢∥f∥p,Ω

for all f∈Lq⁢(Ω)∩Lr⁢(Ω), where

1p=αq+1-αr.

For a proof we refer to [12, Theorem 9.8].

References

[1] R. A. Adams and J. J. F. Fournier, Sobolev Spaces, 2nd ed., Pure Appl. Math. 140, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2003. Suche in Google Scholar

[2] I. Babuška, U. Banerjee and J. E. Osborn, Generalized finite element methods – Main ideas, results and perspective, Int. J. Comput. Methods 1 (2004), no. 1, 67–103. 10.1142/S0219876204000083Suche in Google Scholar

[3] I. Babuška, G. Caloz and J. E. Osborn, Special finite element methods for a class of second order elliptic problems with rough coefficients, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 31 (1994), no. 4, 945–981. 10.1137/0731051Suche in Google Scholar

[4] I. Babuška and J. M. Melenk, The partition of unity method, Int. J. Numer. Meths. Engng. 40 (1997), no. 4, 727–758. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19970228)40:4<727::AID-NME86>3.0.CO;2-NSuche in Google Scholar

[5] I. Babuška and J. E. Osborn, Can a finite element method perform arbitrarily badly?, Math. Comp. 69 (2000), no. 230, 443–462. 10.1090/S0025-5718-99-01085-6Suche in Google Scholar

[6] R. E. Bank and J. Xu, Asymptotically exact a posteriori error estimators. Part I: Grids with superconvergence, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 41 (2003), no. 6, 2294–2312. 10.1137/S003614290139874XSuche in Google Scholar

[7] R. E. Bank and J. Xu, Asymptotically exact a posteriori error estimators. Part II: General unstructured grids, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 41 (2003), no. 6, 2313–2332. 10.1137/S0036142901398751Suche in Google Scholar

[8] A. Bensoussan, J.-L. Lions and G. Papanicolaou, Asymptotic Analysis for Periodic Structures, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978. Suche in Google Scholar

[9] A. Bonito, R. A. Devore and R. H. Nochetto, Adaptive finite element methods for elliptic problems with discontinuous coefficients, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 51 (2013), no. 6, 3106–3134. 10.1137/130905757Suche in Google Scholar

[10] D. Cioranescu and P. Donato, An Introduction to Homogenization, Oxford University Press, New York, 1999. 10.1093/oso/9780198565543.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

[11] W. E, B. Engquist, X. Li, W. Ren and E. Vanden-Eijnden, Heterogeneous multiscale methods: A review, Commun. Comput. Phys. 2 (2007), no. 3, 367–450. Suche in Google Scholar

[12] D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2nd ed., Springer, Berlin, 1983. Suche in Google Scholar

[13] V. V. Jikov, S. M. Kozlov and O. A. Oleinik, Homogenization of Differential Operators and Integral Functionals, Springer, Berlin, 1994. 10.1007/978-3-642-84659-5Suche in Google Scholar

[14] M. Križek and P. Naittaanmäki, Superconvergence phenomenon in the finite element method arising from averaging of gradients, Numer. Math. 45 (1984), 105–116. 10.1007/BF01379664Suche in Google Scholar

[15] J. M. Melenk and I. Babuška, The partition of unity finite element method: Basic theory and applications, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 139 (1996), no. 1–4, 289–314. 10.1016/S0045-7825(96)01087-0Suche in Google Scholar

[16] N. G. Meyers, An Lp-estimate for the gradient of solutions of second order elliptic divergence equations, Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (3) 17 (1963), no. 3, 189–206. Suche in Google Scholar

[17] T. Preusser, M. Rumpf, S. Sauter and L. O. Schwen, 3D Composite Finite Elements for Elliptic Boundary Value Problems with Discontinuous Coefficients, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 33 (2011), no. 5, 2115–2143. 10.1137/100791750Suche in Google Scholar

[18] S. I. Repin, A Posteriori Error Estimates for Partial Differential Equations, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2008. 10.1515/9783110203042Suche in Google Scholar

[19] S. I. Repin, T. S. Samrowski and S. A. Sauter, Combined a posteriori modeling-discretization error estimate for elliptic problems with complicated interfaces, ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 46 (2012), 1389–1405. 10.1051/m2an/2012007Suche in Google Scholar

[20] C. G. Simader and H. Sohr, The Dirichlet Problem for the Laplacian in Bounded and Unbounded Domains: A New Approach to Weak, Strong and (2+k)-Solutions in Sobolev-Type Spaces, Pitman Research Notes in Math. 360, Addison Wesley Longman, Harlow, 1996. Suche in Google Scholar

[21] T. Strouboulis, I. Babuška and K. Copps, The design and analysis of the generalized finite element method, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 181 (2000), no. 1–3, 43–69. 10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00072-9Suche in Google Scholar

[22] T. Strouboulis, K. Copps and I. Babuška, The generalized finite element method: An example of its implementation and illustration of its performance, Int. J. Numer. Meths. Engng. 47 (2000), no. 8, 1401–1417. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(20000320)47:8<1401::AID-NME835>3.0.CO;2-8Suche in Google Scholar

[23] T. Strouboulis, K. Copps and I. Babuška, The generalized finite element method, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 190 (2001), no. 32–33, 4081–4193. 10.1016/S0045-7825(01)00188-8Suche in Google Scholar

[24] M. Weymuth, Adaptive local basis for elliptic problems with L∞-coefficients, Ph.D. thesis, University of Zurich, 2016. Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Z. Zhang and A. Naga, A new finite element gradient recovery method: Superconvergence property, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 26 (2005), 1192–1213. 10.1137/S1064827503402837Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2017-4-6

Revised: 2017-5-18

Accepted: 2017-5-19

Published Online: 2017-6-21

Published in Print: 2017-7-1

Sie haben derzeit keinen Zugang zu diesem Inhalt.

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.1515/cmam-2017-0015

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

A Posteriori Error Estimation; Elliptic Regularity; Model Simplification