Elsevier

Journal of Computational Physics

Volume 229, Issue 19, 20 September 2010, Pages 7162-7179
Journal of Computational Physics

Numerical method for solving matrix coefficient elliptic equation with sharp-edged interfaces

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.005Get rights and content

Abstract

Solving elliptic equations with sharp-edged interfaces is a challenging problem for most existing methods, especially when the solution is highly oscillatory. Nonetheless, it has wide applications in engineering and science. An accurate and efficient method is desired. We propose an efficient non-traditional finite element method with non-body-fitting grids to solve the matrix coefficient elliptic equations with sharp-edged interfaces. Extensive numerical experiments show that this method is second order accurate in the L norm and that it can handle both sharp-edged interface and oscillatory solutions.

Introduction

The importance of elliptic interface problems has been well recognized in a variety of disciplines, such as electromagnetics, material science, fluid dynamics and so on. However, designing highly efficient methods for these problems is a difficult job because of the low global regularity of the solution. Since 1977, after the pioneering work of Peskin [14], much attention has been paid to the numerical solution of elliptic equations with discontinuous coefficients and singular sources on regular Cartesian grids. In many studies, simple Cartesian grids are preferred. In this way, the complicated procedure of generating an unstructured grid can be bypassed, and we can use well developed fast algebraic solvers.

The “immersed boundary” method [14], [15] uses a numerical approximation of the δ-function, which smears out the solution on a thin finite band around the interface Γ. In [16], the “immersed boundary” method was combined with the level-set method, resulting in a first order numerical method that is simple to implement, even in multiple spatial dimensions. However, for both methods, the numerical smearing at the interface forces continuity of the solution at the interface, regardless of the interface condition [u] = a, where a might not be zero.

In [11], [12], a fast method for solving Laplace’s equations on irregular regions with smooth boundaries was introduced. By using Fredholm integral equations of the second kind, solutions can be extended to a rectangular region. Since solutions are harmonic, Fredholm integral equations can be used to capture the jump conditions in the solution and its normal derivative, [u]  0 and [un] = 0. Then these jump conditions are used to evaluate the discrete Laplacian, and then a fast Poisson solver on a regular region can be applied with second or higher order accuracy.

In [5], the “immersed interface” method was presented. This method achieves second order accuracy by incorporating the interface conditions into the finite difference stencil in a way that preserves the interface conditions in both solution and its co-normal derivative, [u]  0 and [βun]  0. The corresponding linear system is sparse, but not symmetric or positive definite. Various applications and extensions of the “immersed interface” method are discussed in [8].

In [20], a finite element method was developed for solving elliptic problems with the interface conditions [u] = 0 and [βun]   0. Interfaces are aligned with cell boundaries. Second order accuracy was obtained in an energy norm. Nearly second order accuracy was obtained in the L2 norm.

In [6], a fast iterative method in conjunction with the “immersed interface” method has been developed for constant coefficient problems with the interface conditions [u] = 0 and [βun]  0. Non-body-fitting Cartesian grids are used, and then associated uniform triangulations are added on. Interfaces are not necessarily aligned with cell boundaries. Numerical evidence shows that this method’s conforming version achieves second order accuracy in the L norm, and higher than first order for its non-conforming version.

The boundary condition capturing method [9] uses the Ghost fluid method (GFM) [2] to capture the boundary conditions. The GFM is robust and simple to implement, and so is the resulting boundary condition capturing method. The boundary condition capturing method has been sped up by a multi-grid method [17]. The convergence proof for the method is provided in [10]. The boundary condition capturing method can be obtained from discretizing the weak formulation provided in [10]. The convergence proof follows naturally. The method can solve the elliptic equation with interface conditions [u]   0 and [βun]  0 in two and three dimensions. However, the original version is only first order accurate. In a recent work [25], the method is improved to second order accuracy for smooth interfaces.

In [4], a non-traditional finite element formulation for solving elliptic equations with smooth or sharp-edged interfaces was proposed with non-body-fitting grids for [u]  0 and [βun]  0. It achieved second order accuracy in the L norm for smooth interfaces and about 0.8th order for sharp-edged interfaces. In [21], the matched interface and boundary (MIB) method was proposed to solve elliptic equations with smooth interfaces. In [19], the MIB method was generalized to treat sharp-edged interfaces. With an elegant treatment, second order accuracy was achieved in the L norm. However, for oscillatory solutions, the errors degenerate. Also, there has been a large body of work from the finite volume perspective for developing high order methods for elliptic equations in complex domains, such as [22], [23] for two dimensional problems and [24] for three dimensional problems. Another recent work in this area is a class of kernel-free boundary integral (KFBI) methods for solving elliptic BVPs, presented in [18].

In this paper, inspired by the boundary condition capturing method [9] and the weak formulation derived in [10], we further generalize the method introduced in [4]. We use a finite element formulation for solving elliptic equations with sharp-edged interfaces with β being uniformly elliptic (therefore, positive definite) and lower order terms present. We provided proofs for the generalized version of the theorems in [10], and we proved the resulting linear system is (unsymmetric) positive definite if β is positive definite and lower order terms are not present. We also provided extensive numerical experiments. Compared with the previous work in [4], we improved the order of accuracy for sharp-edged interface from 0.8th to close to second order, see Example 4. Compared with the results in [19], the more oscillatory the solution is, the more advantageous our method is, see Example 1, Example 2, Example 3. The orders of accuracy for different regularity of solutions and different regularity of the interface are listed in Table 11.

Section snippets

Equations and weak formulation

Consider an open bounded domain Ω  Rd. Let Γ be an interface of co-dimension d  1, which divides Ω into disjoint open subdomains, Ω and Ω+, hence Ω = Ω  Ω+  Γ. Assume that the boundary Ω and the boundary of each subdomain Ω± are Lipschitz continuous as submanifolds. Since Ω± are Lipschitz continuous, so is Γ. A unit normal vector of Γ can be defined a.e. on Γ, see Section 1.5 in [3].

We seek solutions of the variable coefficient elliptic equation away from the interface Γ given by-·(β(x)u(x))+p(

Numerical method

For ease of discussion in this section, and for accuracy testing in the next section, we assume that a, b and c are smooth on the closure of Ω, β and f are smooth on Ω+ and Ω, but they may be discontinuous across the interface Γ. However, Ω, Ω and Ω+ are kept to be Lipschitz continuous. We assume that there is a Lipschitz continuous and piecewise smooth level-set function ϕ on Ω, where Γ = {ϕ = 0}, Ω = {ϕ < 0} and Ω+ = {ϕ > 0}. A unit vector n=ϕ|ϕ| can be obtained on Ω¯, which is a unit normal

Numerical experiments

Consider the problem-·(βu)+p·u+qu=f,inΩ±,[u]=a,onΓ,[(βu)·n]=b,onΓ,u=g,onΩ,on the rectangular domain Ω =  (xmin, xmax) ×  (ymin, ymax). Γ is an interface and prescribed by the zero level-set {(x, y)  Ω ∣ ϕ(x, y)  = 0} of a level-set function ϕ(x,y). The unit normal vector of Γ is n=ϕ|ϕ| pointing from Ω = {(x, y)  Ω ∣ ϕ(x, y)  0} to Ω+ = {(x, y)  Ω ∣ ϕ(x, y)  0}.

In all numerical experiments below, the level-set function ϕ(x, y), the coefficients β±(x, y), p±(x, y), q±(x, y) and the solutionsu=u+(x,y),inΩ+,u=u-(x,y),

Conclusion

In this paper, we generalized the previous work in [4] to solve matrix coefficient second order elliptic equations with lower order terms present (see Example 11) for interface problems. We provided proofs for the generalized version of theorems in [4]. We also proved that the matrix for the linear system generated by our method is positive definite (but not symmetric). Through numerical experiments, our method achieved second order accuracy in the L norm, and we can handle the difficulties of

Acknowledgement

This research is partially supported by Louisiana Board of Regents RCS Grant No. LEQSF (2008–11)-RD-A-18.

References (25)

  • Xu-Dong Liu et al.

    A boundary condition capturing method for Poisson’s equation on irregular domains

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2000)
  • Xu-Dong Liu et al.

    Convergence of the ghost fluid method for elliptic equations with interfaces

    Math. Comp.

    (2003)
  • Cited by (82)

    • Error analysis of Petrov-Galerkin immersed finite element methods

      2023, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering
    • Optimal error bound for immersed weak Galerkin finite element method for elliptic interface problems

      2022, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Later Adjerid and Lin [43–48] developed the IFE functions with an arbitrary polynomial degree. Recently by imitating IFEM, which combines the idea of immersed methods with the classical FEM, the immersed idea has been combined with non-classical FEM and finite volume method, such as immersed Petrov–Galerkin method [49,50], nonconforming IFEM [51–53], immersed discontinuous Galerkin method [54,55], partially penalized immersed finite element method (PP-IFEM) [47,54,56–58] and immersed finite volume method [59–61]. Lately, the WG-FEM has been presented for elliptic interface problems [64,72–75].

    • A new primal-dual weak Galerkin method for elliptic interface problems with low regularity assumptions

      2022, Journal of Computational Physics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Even though successes have been achieved in the endeavor of solving elliptic interface problems, challenges remain in the search of new and efficient numerical algorithms for problems with very complicated interface geometries, and for problems with low-regularity solutions. The low-regularity of the solution is often caused by the geometric singularities of the interfaces and/or the non-smoothness of the interface data [37,26]. The paper is organized as follows.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text