Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Substituting
λ div u = p,
( 3 . 30 )
and using the weak version of (3.30), we are led to the following problem: Find
(u, p) H 1
() × L 2 () such that
for all v H 1 (),
2 µ(ε(u), ε(v)) 0 + ( div v, p) 0 = , v
( 3 . 31 )
1
λ (p, q) 0
( div u, q) 0
=
0
for all q L 2 ().
Since the bilinear form (ε(u), ε(v)) 0 is elliptic on H 1
, (3.31) is very similar to the
Stokes problem; see Ch. III, §6. As we observed there, in the case where 0 =
(more precisely if the two-dimensional measure of 1 vanishes), pdx =
0, and
L 2 () should be replaced by L 2 ()/ R
.
We know from the theory of mixed problems with penalty terms that the
stability of (3.31) is the same as for the problem
2 µ(ε(u), ε(v)) 0 + ( div v, p) 0 = , v ,
( div u, q) 0
=
0 ,
. The situation here is simple, since the quadratic form (ε(v), ε(v)) 0 is
coercive on the entire space and not just for divergence-free functions. Moreover,
the penalty term is a regular perturbation. Therefore, we can solve (3.31) using
the same elements as for the Stokes problem. Since the inverse of the associated
operator
as λ →∞
L : H 1
× L 2 (H 1
× L 2 )
is bounded independently of the parameter λ , the finite element solution converges
uniformly in λ .
To be more specific, consider the discretization
2 µ(ε(u h ), ε(v)) 0 + ( div v, p h ) 0 = , v
for all v X h ,
( 3 . 31 ) h
( div u h ,q) 0 λ 1 (p, q h ) 0 =
0
for all q M h ,
with X h H 1
(), M h L 2 () . The commonly used Stokes elements have the
following approximation property. Given v H 1 () and q L 2 () , there exist
P h v X h and Q h q M h such that
v P h v 1 ch v 2 ,
q Q h q 0 ch q 1 .
( 3 . 32 )
For convenience, we restrict ourselves to pure displacement boundary conditions.
Good approximation is guaranteed by the following regularity result. If is a
convex polygonal domain, or if has a smooth boundary, then
u 2 + λ
div u 1 c | f 0 ;
( 3 . 33 )
Search WWH ::




Custom Search