Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Weighted Finite-Element Method for Elasticity Problems with Singularity

Written By

Viktor Anatolievich Rukavishnikov and Elena Ivanovna Rukavishnikova

Submitted: 19 May 2017 Reviewed: 27 November 2017 Published: 28 February 2018

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72733

From the Edited Volume

Finite Element Method - Simulation, Numerical Analysis and Solution Techniques

Edited by Răzvan Păcurar

Chapter metrics overview

1,361 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

In this chapter, the two-dimensional elasticity problem with a singularity caused by the presence of a re-entrant corner on the domain boundary is considered. For this problem, the notion of the Rv-generalized solution is introduced. On the basis of the Rv-generalized solution, a scheme of the weighted finite-element method (FEM) is constructed. The proposed method provides a first-order convergence of the approximate solution to the exact one with respect to the mesh step in the W 2 , ν 1 Ω -norm. The convergence rate does not depend on the size of the angle and kind of the boundary conditions imposed on its sides. Comparative analysis of the proposed method with a classical finite-element method and with an FEM with geometric mesh refinement to the singular point is carried out.

Keywords

  • elasticity problem with singularity
  • corner singularity
  • Rv-generalized solution
  • weighted finite-element method
  • numerical experiments

1. Introduction

The singularity of the solution to a boundary value problem can be caused by the degeneration of the input data (of the coefficients and right-hand sides of the equation and the boundary conditions), by the geometry of the boundary, or by the internal properties of the solution. The classic numerical methods, such as finite-difference method, finite- and boundary-element methods, have insufficient convergence rate due to singularity which has an influence on the regularity of the solution. It results in significant increase of the computational power and time required for calculation of the solution with the given accuracy. For example, the classic finite-element method allows the finding of the solution for the elasticity problem posed in a two-dimensional domain containing a re-entrant corner of on the boundary with convergence rate O(h1/2). In this case to compute the solution with the accuracy of 10−3 requires a computational power that is one million times greater than in the case of the weighted finite-element method used for the solution of the same problem.

By using meshes refined toward the singularity point, it is possible to construct schemes of the finite-element method with the first order of the rate of convergence of the approximate solution to the exact one [1, 2, 3].

In [4, 5], for boundary value problems with strongly singular solutions for which a generalized solution could not be defined and it does not belong to the Sobolev space H1, it was proposed to define the solution as a Rv-generalized one. The existence and uniqueness of solutions as well as its coercivity and differential properties in the weighted Sobolev spaces and sets were proved [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10], the weighted finite-element method was built, and its convergence rate was investigated [11, 12, 13, 14, 15].

In this chapter, for the Lamé system in domains containing re-entrant corners we will state construction and investigation of the weighted FEM for determination of the Rv-generalized solution [16, 17]. Convergence rate of this method did not depend on the corner size and was equal O(h) (see [18], Theorem 2.1). For the elasticity problems with solutions of two types—with both singular and regular components and with singular component only—a comparative numerical analysis of the weighted finite-element method, the classic FEM, and the FEM with meshes geometrically refined toward the singularity point is performed. For the first two methods, the theoretical convergence rate estimations were confirmed. In addition, it was established that FEM with graded meshes failed on high dimensional meshes but weighted FEM stably found approximate solution with theoretical accuracy under the same computational conditions. The mentioned failure can be explained by a small size of steps of the graded mesh in a neighbourhood of the singular point. As a result, for the majority of nodes, the weighted finite-element method allows to find solution with absolute error which is by one or two orders of magnitude less than that for the FEM with graded meshes.

Advertisement

2. Rv-generalized solution

Let Ω = 1 1 × 1 1 0 1 × 1 0 R 2 be an L-shaped domain with boundary ∂Ω containing re-entrant corner of 3π/2 with the vertex located in the point O(0,0), Ω ¯ = Ω ∂Ω .

Denote by Ω = x Ω : x 1 2 + x 2 2 1 / 2 δ < 1 a part of δ-neighbourhood of the point (0,0) laying in the Ω ¯ . A weight function ρ(x) can be introduced that coincides with the distance to the origin in Ω ¯ , and equals δ for x Ω ¯ \ Ω ¯ .

Let W 2 , α 1 Ω δ be the set of functions satisfying the following conditions:

  1. D k u x c 1 δ / ρ x α + k for x Ω ¯ , where k = 0,1 and c1 is a positive constant independent on k,

  2. u L 2 , α Ω Ω c 2 > 0 ,

with the norm

u W 2 , α 1 Ω = λ 1 Ω ρ 2 α D λ u 2 dx 1 / 2 , E1

where D λ = λ / x 1 λ 1 x 2 λ 2 , λ = (λ1,λ2), and |λ|=λ1+λ2; λ1, λ2 are nonnegative integers, and α is a nonnegative real number.

Let L 2 , α Ω δ be the set of functions satisfying conditions (a) and (b) with the norm

u L 2 , α Ω = Ω ρ 2 α u 2 dx 1 / 2 . I14

The set W ° 2 , α 1 Ω δ W 2 , α 1 Ω δ is defined as the closure in norm (1) of the set C 0 Ω δ of infinitely differentiable and finite in Ω functions satisfying conditions (a) and (b).

One can say that φ W 2 , α 1 / 2 ∂Ω δ if there exists a function Φ from W 2 , α 1 Ω δ such that Φ x ∂Ω = φ x and

φ W 2 , α 1 / 2 ∂Ω δ = inf Φ ∂Ω = ϕ Φ W 2 , α 1 Ω δ .

For the corresponding spaces and sets of vector-functions are used notations W 2 , α 1 Ω δ , L 2 , α Ω δ , W ° 2 , α 1 Ω δ .

Let u = (u1,u2) be a vector-function of displacements. Assume that Ω ¯ is a homogeneous isotropic body and the strains are small. Consider a boundary value problem for the displacement field u for the Lamé system with constant coefficients λ and μ:

2 div με u + λ div u = f , x Ω , E2
u i = q i , x ∂Ω , E3

Here, ε(u) is a strain tensor with components ε ij u = 1 2 u i x j + u j x i .

Assume that the right-hand sides of (2), (3) satisfy the conditions

f L 2 , β Ω δ , q i W 2 , β 1 / 2 ∂Ω δ , i = 1 , 2 , β > 0 . E4

Denoted by

a 1 u v = Ω λ + 2 μ u 1 x 1 ρ 2 ν v 1 x 1 + μ u 1 x 2 ρ 2 ν v 1 x 2 + λ u 2 x 2 ρ 2 ν v 1 x 1 + μ u 2 x 1 ρ 2 ν v 1 x 2 dx ,
a 2 u v = Ω λ u 1 x 1 ρ 2 ν v 2 x 2 + μ u 1 x 2 ρ 2 ν v 2 x 1 + λ + 2 μ u 2 x 2 ρ 2 ν v 2 x 2 + μ u 2 x 1 ρ 2 ν v 2 x 1 dx ,
l 1 v = Ω ρ 2 ν f 1 v 1 dx , l 2 v = Ω ρ 2 ν f 2 v 2 dx

the bilinear and linear forms and a u v = a 1 u v a 2 u v , l v = l 1 v l 2 v .

Advertisement

Definition 1

A function uv from the set W 2 , ν 1 Ω δ is called an Rv-generalized solution to the problem (2), (3) if it satisfies boundary condition (3) almost everywhere on ∂Ω and for every v from W 2 , ν 1 Ω δ the integral identity

a u ν v = l v E5

holds for any fixed value of ν satisfying the inequality

ν β . E6

In [17], for the boundary value problem (2)–(3) with homogeneous boundary conditions, existence and uniqueness of its Rv-generalized solution were established.

Advertisement

Theorem 1

Let condition (4) be satisfied. Then for any ν > β there always exists parameter δ such that the problem (2)–(3) with homogeneous boundary conditions has a unique Rv-generalized solution uv in the set W ° 2 , α 1 Ω δ . In this case

u ν W 2 , ν 1 Ω c 3 f L 2 , β Ω , E7

where c3 is a positive constant independent of f.

Then for any ν > β , there always exists parameter δ such that the problem (2)–(3) with homogeneous boundary conditions has a unique Rv-generalized solution uv in the set W ° 2 , α 1 Ω δ .

Advertisement

Comment 1

At present, there exists a complete theory of classical solutions to boundary value problems with smooth initial data (equation coefficients, right hands of solution and boundary conditions) and with smooth enough domain boundary [19, 20, 21, 22].

On the basis of the generalized solution-wide investigations of boundary value problems with discontinuous initial data and not smooth domain boundary were performed in Sobolev and different weighted spaces [23, 24, 25, 26]. On the basis of the Galerkin method, theories of difference schemes, finite volumes, and finite-element method were developed to find approximate generalized solution [27].

Let us call boundary value problem a problem with strong singularity if its generalized solution could not be defined. This solution does not belong to the Sobolev space W 2 1 (H1), or, in other words, the Dirichlet integral of the solution diverges. In [4, 5], we suggested to define a solution to the boundary value problems with strong singularity as an Rv-generalized one in the weighted Sobolev space. The essence of this approach is in introducing weight function into the integral equality. The weight function coincides with the distance to the singular points in their neighbourhoods. The role (sense, mission) of this function is in suppressing of the solution singularity caused by the problem features and is in assuring convergence of integrals in both parts of the integral equality. Taking into account the local character of the singularity, we define weight function as the distance to each singularity point inside the disk of radius δ centered in that points, and outside these disks the weight function equals δ. An exponent of the weight function in the definition of the Rν-generalized solution as well as weighted space containing this solution depend on the spaces to which problem initial data belongs, on geometrical features of the boundary (re-entrant corners), and on changing of the boundary condition type.

In [13, 14], for the transformed system of Maxwell equations in the domain with re-entrant corner in which the solution does not depend on the space W 2 1 , the weighted edge-based finite-element method was developed on the basis of introducing the Rν-generalized solution. Convergence rate of this method is O(h), and it does not depend on the size of singularity as opposed to other methods [28, 29].

The proposed approach of introducing Rν-generalized solution allows to effectively find solutions not only to the boundary value problems with divergent Dirichlet integral but also to problems with weak singularity when the solution belongs to the W 2 1 and does not belong to the space W 2 2 .

Advertisement

3. The weighted finite-element method

A finite-element scheme for problems (2)–(3) is constructed relying on the definition of an Rν-generalized solution. For this purpose, a quasi-uniform triangulation Th of Ω ¯ and introduction of special basis functions are constructed.

The domain Ω ¯ is divided into a finite number of triangles K (called finite elements) with vertices Pk (k = 1,…,N), which are triangulation nodes. Denoted by Ω h = K T h K —the union of all elements; here, h is the longest of their side lengths. It is required that the partition satisfies the conventional constraints imposed on triangulations [10]. Denote by P = P k k = 1 k = n , the set of triangulation internal nodes; by P = P k k = n + 1 k = N , the set of nodes belonging to the ∂Ω.

Each node P k P is associated with a function Ψ k of the form

Ψ k x = ρ ν x ϕ k x , k = 1 , , n ,

where ϕ k x is linear on each finite element, ϕ k P j = δ kj , k , j = 1 , , n δ kj is the Kronecker delta, and ν is a real number.

The set V h is defined as the linear span of the system of basis functions Ψ k k = 1 k = n . Denote the corresponding vector set by V h = V h 2 . In set V h , one singled out the subset V ° h = { v V h v i P k P k ∂Ω = 0 , i = 1 , 2 } .

Associated with the constructed triangulation, the finite-element approximation of the displacement vector components has the form

u ν , 1 h = k = 1 n d 2 k 1 Ψ k , u ν , 2 h = k = 1 n d 2 k Ψ k , d j = ρ ν P j + 1 2 c j , j = 1 , , 2 n .
Advertisement

Definition 2

An approximate R ν -generalized solution to the problems (2)–(3) by the weighted finite-element method is a function u ν h V h such that it satisfies the boundary condition (3) in the nodes of the boundary ∂Ω and for arbitrary v h x V h and ν > β the integral identity

a u ν h v h = l v h ,

holds, where u ν h = u ν , 1 h u ν , 2 h .

In [18], it was shown that convergence rate of the approximate solution to the exact one does not depend on size of the re-entrant corner and is always equal to O h when weighted finite-element method is used for finding an R ν -generalized solution to elasticity problem. The next section explains results of comparative numerical analysis for the model problems (2)–(3) of the weighted FEM using the classical finite-element method and the FEM with geometrically graded meshes of two kinds.

Advertisement

4. Results of numerical experiments

In the domain, Ω is considered a Dirichlet problem for the Lamé system (2), (3) with constant coefficients λ = 3 and μ = 5 . Two kinds of vector-function u = u 1 u 2 were used as a solution to the problem.

Advertisement

Problem A

Components of the solution u of the model problem (2), (3) contain only a singular component

u 1 = cos x 1 co s 2 x 2 x 1 2 + x 2 2 0.3051 ,
u 2 = co s 2 x 1 cos x 2 x 1 2 + x 2 2 0.3051 .

Singularity order of u1, u2 corresponds to the size of the re-entrant corner γ = 3 π / 2 on the domain boundary [30].

Advertisement

Problem B

Solution u of the model problems (2, 3) contains both singular and regular components—regular part belongs to the W 2 2 Ω

u 1 = cos x 1 co s 2 x 2 x 1 2 + x 2 2 0.3051 + x 1 2 + x 2 2 ,
u 2 = co s 2 x 1 cos x 2 x 1 2 + x 2 2 0.3051 + x 1 2 + x 2 2 .

4.1. Comparative analysis of the generalized and R ν -generalized solutions

Results of numerical experiments presented in this subsection were obtained using the code ”Proba-IV” [31] with regular meshes which were built by the following scheme:

Domain Ω was divided into squares by lines parallel to coordinate axis, with distance equal to 1/N between them, where N is a half of number of partitioning segments along the greater side;

Each square was subdivided into two triangles by the diagonal.

In this case, size of the mesh-step h could be computed by h = 2 / N . Example of the regular mesh for N = 4 is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Example of regular mesh (a), and graded meshes I (b) and II (c) (N = 4, κ = 0.4 ).

Calculations were performed for different values of N. Optimal parameters δ, ν , and ν were obtained by the program complex [32]. Generalized solution was determined by the integral equality (5) for ν = 0 .

One calculated the errors e = e 1 e 2 = u 1 u 1 h u 2 u 2 h and e ν = e ν , 1 e ν , 2 = u 1 u ν , 1 h u 2 u ν , 2 h of numerical approximation to the generalized u h = u 1 h u 2 h and R ν -generalized u ν h = u 1 , ν h u 2 , ν h solutions, respectively. Problems A and B in Tables 1 and 4, respectively, present values of relative errors of the generalized solution in the norm of the Sobolev space W 2 1 η = e W 2 1 u W 2 1 and the R ν -generalized one in the norm of the weighted Sobolev space W 2 , ν 1 η ν = e ν W 2 , ν 1 u W 2 , ν 1 with different values of h . In addition, these tables contain ratios between error norms, obtained on meshes with step reducing twice. Figures 2 and 3 show the convergence rates of the generalized and R ν -generalized solutions to the corresponding problems with the logarithmic scale. The dashed line in the figures corresponds to convergence with the rate O h . Tables 2 and 3 (Problem A) and Tables 5 and 6 (Problem B) give limit values: number of nodes where |e1|, |e2|, |ev,1|, and |ev,2| belong to the giving range, this number in percentage to the total number of nodes, and pictures of the absolute error distribution in the domain Ω.

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
h 1.105e-2 5.524e-3 2.762e-3 1.381e-3 6.905e-4 3.453e-4
η 6.963e-2 1.52 4.579e-2 1.52 3.007e-2 1.52 1.972e-2 1.53 1.293e-2 1.53 8.476e-3
η ν 7.011e-2 1.55 4.522e-2 1.64 2.756e-2 2.17 1.272e-2 2.21 5.745e-3 1.98 2.902e-3

Table 1.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized ( η ) and R ν -generalized ( η ν ) ( δ = 0.0029 , ν = 1.2 , ν = 0.16 ) solution to problem A on mesh step.

Figure 2.

Chart of η for the generalized (squared line) and of η ν for R ν -generalized (circled line) (δ=0.0029, ν=1.2, ν*=0.16) solutions to the problem A in dependence on the number of subdivisions 2N.

Figure 3.

Chart of η for the generalized (squared line) and of η ν for R ν -generalized (circled line) ( δ = 0.0029 , ν = 1.2 , ν = 0.16 ) solutions to the problem B in dependence on the number of subdivisions 2N.

Table 2.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e i i = 1 2 of finding components of the approximate generalized solution to problem A are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 4096 .

Table 3.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e ν , i i = 1 2 of finding components of the approximate R ν -generalized solution to problem A ( δ = 0.0029 , ν = 1.2 , ν = 0.16 ) are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 4096 .

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
h 1.105e-2 5.524e-3 2.762e-3 1.381e-3 6.905e-4 3.453e-4
η 2.849e-2 1.54 1.850e-2 1.53 1.205e-2 1.53 7.870e-3 1.53 5.146e-3 1.53 3.367e-3
η ν 2.868e-2 1.57 1.827e-2 1.65 1.107e-2 2.16 5.117e-3 2.21 2.319e-3 1.98 1.171e-3

Table 4.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized η and R ν -generalized η ν ( δ = 0.0029 , ν = 1.2 , ν = 0.16 solution of the problem B on the mesh step.

Table 5.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e i i = 1 2 of finding components of the approximate generalized solution to problem B are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 4096 .

Table 6.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e ν , i i = 1 2 ) of finding components of the approximate R ν -generalized solution to problem B ( ( δ = 0.0029 , ν = 1.2 , ν = 0.16 ) are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 4096 .

4.1.1. Problem A

4.1.2. Problem B

4.2. FEM with graded mesh: comparative analysis

This subsection presents results of error analysis for finding generalized solution to the problems A and B by the FEM with graded meshes of two kinds (for detailed information about graded meshes, see [2, 33, 34]).

Mesh I. This partitioning was built by the following scheme

  1. In the domain Ω , for a given N, regular mesh was constructed as described in section 4.1.

  2. Level l = max i = 1 , 2 N x i + 1 N was determined for each node. Here, x i ( i = 1 , 2 ) are initial node coordinates on the regular mesh, means integer part.

  3. New coordinates of nodes of the graded mesh are calculated by the formula x i + 1 N N l 1 l / N 1 / κ ( i = 1 , 2 ).

Mesh II. Constructing process for this mesh differs from the one described earlier in the level-calculating mode. Here, l = i = 1 2 N x i + 1 N . In this case, new coordinates are determined only for nodes with l N .

Examples of meshes I and II are shown in Figure 1(b) and (c), respectively.

The FEM solution obtained on described graded meshes converges with the first rate on the mesh step when the value of the parameter κ is less than the order of singularity [2, 33].

Calculations were performed for different values of N and κ . For each node, one calculated the errors e I = u u I h and e II = u u II h of the approximate generalized solutions u I h , u II h obtained on meshes I and II, respectively. The values of relative errors of the generalized solution to the problems A and B in the norm of the Sobolev space W 2 1 for different values of h and κ for mesh I η I = e I W 2 1 u W 2 1 are presented in Tables 7 and 10, respectively, and for mesh II η II = e II W 2 1 u W 2 1 are presented in Tables 8 and 11, respectively. In addition, these tables contain ratios between error norms and between mesh steps obtained with nodes number increasing four times. Figures 4 and 5 show the convergence rates of the generalized solutions to the corresponding problems for meshes I and II with the logarithmic scale. Dashed line in the figures corresponds to convergence with the rate O(h) as in paragraph 1. Besides, for the problems A and B, Tables 9 and 12, respectively, contain limit values for the following data: number of nodes where e 1 , II , e 2 , II belong to the giving range, this number in percentage to the total number of nodes, and pictures of the absolute error distribution in the domain Ω .

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
κ = 0.3
η I 2.659e-2 2.00 1.332e-2 2.00 6.675e-3 1.91 3.501e-3 0.75 4.650e-3 0.27 1.741e-2
h 0.062263 1.979 0.031459 1.99 0.015812 1.995 0.007926 1.997 0.003968 1.999 0.001985
κ = 0.4
η I 2.111e-2 2.00 1.057e-2 1.99 5.302e-3 1.78 2.971e-3 0.53 5.559e-3 0.26 2.154e-2
h 0.044928 1.986 0.02262 1.993 0.011349 1.997 0.005684 1.998 0.002845 1.999 0.001423
κ = 0.5
η I 1.990e-2 1.99 1.001e-2 1.99 5.038e-3 1.71 2.940e-3 0.46 6.401e-3 0.25 2.513e-2
h 0.034611 1.99 0.017387 1.995 0.008714 1.998 0.004362 1.999 0.0021823 1.999 0.001092
κ = 0.6
η I 2.315e-2 1.92 1.204e-2 1.93 6.254e-3 1.70 3.678e-3 0.50 7.292e-3 0.26 2.818e-2
h 0.030169 1.993 0.015135 1.997 0.007580 1.998 0.003793 1.999 0.0018973 1.9996 0.0009489

Table 7.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized solution to problem A with mesh I on the mesh step for different κ .

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
κ = 0.3
η II 2.392e-2 2.00 1.196e-2 2.00 5.982e-3 1.99 3.012e-3 1.46 2.059e-3 0.36 5.687e-3
h 0.05114 1.982 0.025805 1.99 0.012962 1.995 0.006496 1.998 0.003252 1.999 0.001627
κ = 0.4
η II 1.974e-2 2.00 9.879e-3 2.00 4.942e-3 1.97 2.511e-3 1.16 2.167e-3 0.30 7.154e-3
h 0.038606 1.988 0.019417 1.994 0.009737 1.997 0.004876 1.999 0.00244 1.999 0.001220
κ = 0.5
η II 1.954e-2 1.98 9.857e-3 1.99 4.963e-3 1.93 2.565e-3 0.94 2.726e-3 0.28 9.725e-3
h 0.031006 1.99 0.015564 1.996 0.007797 1.998 0.003902 1.999 0.001952 1.9995 0.000976
κ = 0.6
η II 2.339e-2 1.91 1.225e-2 1.92 6.386e-3 1.90 3.368e-3 1.14 2.966e-3 0.31 9.712e-3
h 0.025906 1.995 0.012987 1.997 0.006502 1.999 0.003253 1.999 0.001627 1.9997 0.000814

Table 8.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized solution to problem A with mesh II on the mesh step for different κ .

Table 9.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e i , II i = 1 2 of finding components of the approximate generalized solution to problem A obtained with mesh II κ = 0.5 are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 1024 .

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
κ = 0.3
η I 9.851e-3 1.99 4.955e-3 1.97 2.510e-3 1.36 1.845e-3 0.33 5.639e-3 0.25 2.247e-2
h 0.062263 1.979 0.031459 1.99 0.015812 1.995 0.007926 1.997 0.003968 1.999 0.001985
κ = 0.4
η I 7.712e-3 1.99 3.870e-3 1.95 1.988e-3 0.98 2.034e-3 0.28 7.218e-3 0.25 2.866e-2
h 0.044928 1.986 0.02262 1.993 0.011349 1.997 0.005684 1.998 0.002845 1.999 0.001423
κ = 0.5
η I 7.625e-3 1.99 3.839e-3 1.92 1.995e-3 0.87 2.301e-3 0.27 8.676e-3 0.25 3.454e-2
h 0.034611 1.99 0.017387 1.995 0.008714 1.998 0.004362 1.999 0.002182 1.999 0.001091
κ = 0.6
η I 9.330e-3 1.92 4.849e-3 1.88 2.584e-3 0.91 2.847e-3 0.28 1.016e-2 0.25 4.001e-2
h 0.034611 1.99 0.017387 1.995 0.008714 1.998 0.004362 1.999 0.002182 1.999 0.001091

Table 10.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized solution to problem B with mesh I on the mesh step for different κ .

2 N 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
κ = 0.3
η II 5.963e-3 2.00 2.982e-3 2.00 1.492e-3 1.91 7.819e-4 0.77 1.013e-3 0.27 3.757e-3
h 0.05114 1.982 0.025805 1.99 0.012962 1.995 0.006496 1.998 0.003252 1.999 0.0016267
κ = 0.4
η II 6.349e-3 2.00 3.178e-3 2.00 1.591e-3 1.87 8.490e-4 0.67 1.263e-3 0.26 4.805e-3
h 0.038606 1.988 0.019417 1.994 0.009737 1.997 0.004876 1.999 0.00244 1.999 0.0012203
κ = 0.5
η II 7.441e-3 1.98 3.756e-3 1.98 1.894e-3 1.83 1.037e-3 0.60 1.717e-3 0.26 6.606e-3
h 0.031006 1.99 0.015564 1.996 0.007797 1.998 0.003902 1.999 0.001952 1.9995 0.0009763
κ = 0.6
η II 9.574e-3 1.91 5.000e-3 1.92 2.602e-3 1.85 1.409e-3 0.78 1.804e-3 0.27 6.660e-3
h 0.025906 1.995 0.012987 1.997 0.006502 1.999 0.003253 1.999 0.001627 1.9997 0.00081366

Table 11.

Dependence of relative errors of the generalized solution to problem B with mesh II on the mesh step for different κ .

Figure 4.

Chart of η I for mesh I (squared line) and of η II for mesh II (circled line) for problem A depending on the number of subdivisions 2 N ; κ = 0.3 .

Figure 5.

Chart of η I for mesh I (squared line) and of η II for mesh II (circled line) for problem B depending on the number of subdivisions 2 N ; κ = 0.3 .

Table 12.

Number, percentage equivalence, and distribution of nodes where absolute errors e i , II i = 1 2 of finding components of the approximate generalized solution to problem B obtained with mesh II κ = 0.5 are not less than given limit values, 2 N = 1024 .

4.2.1. Problem A

4.2.2. Problem B

5. Conclusions

Presented numerical results have demonstrated that:

  1. An approximate R ν -generalized solution to the problem (2)–(4) converges to the exact one with the rate O h in the norm of the set W 2 , ν 1 Ω δ in contrast with the generalized solution, which converges with the rate O h 0.61 for the classical FEM;

  2. FEM with graded meshes fails on high-dimensional grids because of the small mesh size near the singular point, but the weighted FEM stably allows to find approximate solution with the accuracy O h under the same computational conditions;

For the approximate R ν -generalized solution obtained by the weighted finite-element method, an absolute error value is by one or two orders of magnitude less than the approximate generalized one obtained by the FEM or by the FEM with graded meshes; this holds for the overwhelming majority of nodes.

References

  1. 1. Szabó B, Babuška I. Finite Element Analysis. New York: Wiley; 1991. 368 p
  2. 2. Apel T, Sändig A-M, Whiteman JR. Graded mesh refinement and error estimates for finite element solutions of elliptic boundary value problems in non-smooth domains. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences. 1996;19(1):63-85
  3. 3. Nguyen-Xuan H, Liu GR, Bordas S, Natarajan S, Rabczuk T. An adaptive singular ES-FEM for mechanics problems with singular field of arbitrary order. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2013;253:252-273
  4. 4. Rukavishnikov VA. The weight estimation of the speed of difference scheme convergence. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR. 1986;288(5):1058-1062
  5. 5. Rukavishnikov VA. On the differential properties of Rν-generalized solution of Dirichlet problem. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR. 1989;309(6):1318-1320
  6. 6. Rukavishnikov VA. On the uniqueness of the Rν-generalized solution of boundary value problems with noncoordinated degeneration of the initial data. Doklady Mathematics. 2001;63(1):68-70
  7. 7. Rukavishnikov VA, Ereklintsev AG. On the coercivity of the Rν-generalized solution of the first boundary value problem with coordinated degeneration of the input data. Differential Equations. 2005;41(12):1757-1767. DOI: 10.1007/s10625-006-0012-5
  8. 8. Rukavishnikov VA, Kuznetsova EV. A coercive estimate for a boundary value problem with noncoordinated degeneration of the input data. Differential Equations. 2007;43(4):550-560. DOI: 10.1134/S0012266107040131
  9. 9. Rukavishnikov VA, Kuznetsova EV. The Rν-generalized solution with a singularity of a boundary value problem belongs to the space W 2 , ν + β / 2 + k + 1 k + 2 Ω δ . Differential Equations. 2009;45(6):913-917. DOI: 10.1134/S0012266109060147
  10. 10. Rukavishnikov VA. On the existence and uniqueness of an Rν-generalized solution of a boundary value problem with uncoordinated degeneration of the input data. Doklady Mathematics. 2014;90(2):562-564. DOI: 10.1134/S1064562414060155
  11. 11. Rukavishnikov VA. The Dirichlet problem with the noncoordinated degeneration of the initial data. Doklady Akademii Nauk. 1994;337(4):447-449
  12. 12. Rukavishnikov VA, Rukavishnikova HI. The finite element method for a boundary value problem with strong singularity. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics. 2010;234(9):2870-2882. DOI: 10.1016/j.cam.2010.01.020
  13. 13. Rukavishnikov VA, Mosolapov AO. New numerical method for solving time-harmonic Maxwell equations with strong singularity. Journal of Computational Physics. 2012;231(6):2438-2448. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2011.11.031
  14. 14. Rukavishnikov VA, Mosolapov AO. Weighted edge finite element method for Maxwell’s equations with strong singularity. Doklady Mathematics. 2013;87(2):156-159. DOI: 10.1134/S1064562413020105
  15. 15. Rukavishnikov VA, Rukavishnikova HI. On the error estimation of the finite element method for the boundary value problems with singularity in the Lebesgue weighted space. Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization. 2013;34(12):1328-1347. DOI: 10.1080/01630563.2013.809582
  16. 16. Rukavishnikov VA, Nikolaev SG. Weighted finite element method for an elasticity problem with singularity. Doklady Mathematics. 2013;88(3):705-709. DOI: 10.1134/S1064562413060215
  17. 17. Rukavishnikov VA, Nikolaev SG. On the Rν-generalized solution of the Lame system with corner singularity. Doklady Mathematics. 2015;92(1):421-423. DOI: 10.1134/S1064562415040080
  18. 18. Rukavishnikov VA. Weighted FEM for two-dimensional easticity problem with corner singularity. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering. 2016;112:411-419. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-39929-4_39
  19. 19. Douglis A, Nirenberg L. Interior estimates for elliptic systems of partial differential equations. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics. 1955;8:503-538
  20. 20. Agmon S, Douglis A, Nirenberg L. Estimates near the boundary for solutions of elliptic partial differential equations satisfying general boundary conditions, I, II. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics. 1959/1964;12/17:623-727, 35-92
  21. 21. Hörmander L. Linear Partial Differential Operators. Berlin: Springer; 1963
  22. 22. Lopatinsky YB. On a method of reducing boundary problems for a system of differential equations of elliptic type to regular integral equations. Ukrains'kyi Matematychnyi Zhurnal. 1953;5:123-151
  23. 23. Ladyzhenskaya OA. The Boundary Value Problems of Mathematical Physics. Moscow: Nauka; 1973. 408 p
  24. 24. Maz’ya VG, Plamenevskii BA. Lp-estimates of solutions of elliptic boundary value problems in domains with ribs. Trudy Moskovskogo Matematicheskogo Obshchestva. 1978;37:49-93
  25. 25. Grisvard P. Elliptic Problems in Nonsmooth Domains. London: Pitman; 1985. 410 p
  26. 26. Dauge M. Elliptic Boundary Value Problems on Corner Domains. Berlin: Springer; 1988. 264 p
  27. 27. Samarski AA, Andreev VB. Finite Difference Methods for Elliptic Equations. Moscow: Nauka; 1976. 352 p
  28. 28. Assous A, Ciarlet P Jr, Segré J. Numerical solution to the time-dependent Maxwell equations in two-dimensional singular domains: The singular complement method. Journal of Computational Physics. 2000;161:218-249
  29. 29. Costabel M, Dauge M. Weighted regularization of Maxwell equations in polyhedral domains. Numerische Mathematik. 2002;93:239-277
  30. 30. Rössle A. Corner singularities and regulatiy of weak solutions for the two-dimensional Lamé equations on domains with angular corners. Journal of Elasticity. 2000;60(1):57-75
  31. 31. Nikolaev SG, Rukavishnikov VA. Proba IV, programm for the numerical solution of the two-dimensional elasticity problems with singularity: 2013616248 Russian Federation. Computer programms. Data bases. IC Chips Topology. 2013;3(84)
  32. 32. Rukavishnikov VA, Maslov OV, Mosolapov AO, Nikolaev SG. Automated software complex for determination of the optimal parameters set for the weighted finite element method on computer clusters. Computational Nanotechnology. 2015;1:9-19
  33. 33. Oganesyan LA, Rukhovets LA. Variational-difference methods for solving elliptic equations. Yerevan: Izdatel’stvo Akad. Nauk. Arm. SSR; 1979. 235 p
  34. 34. Raugel G. Résolution numérique par une méthode d’éléments finis du probléme Dirichlet pour le Laplacien dans un polygone. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences. 1978;286:A791-A794

Written By

Viktor Anatolievich Rukavishnikov and Elena Ivanovna Rukavishnikova

Submitted: 19 May 2017 Reviewed: 27 November 2017 Published: 28 February 2018