Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
3.10 Lemma. Assume that (3.34) and (3.35) hold. Let the mapping div h : X h
L 2 () satisfy
div v
div h v 0 ch v 2
( 3 . 38 )
and
div h v = 0
div v = 0 .
if
( 3 . 39 )
Then we have
div h u 0 c h f 0
λ
div u
( 3 . 40 )
where u denotes the solution of the variational problem (3.31).
Proof. By (3.34) and (3.37) there exists w H 2 () H 0 () such that div w =
div u and
div u 1 1
w 2 c
f 0 .
From (3.38) we conclude that
div h w 0 c h w 2 c 1
div w
f 0 .
( 3 . 41 )
Since div (w u) =
0, it follows from (3.39) that div h (w u) =
0 and div u
div h u =
div w
div h w . Combining this with (3.41) we obtain
div h w 0 c 1
div u
div h u 0 =
div w
f 0 ,
and the proof is complete.
Now the discretization error for nearly incompressible material is estimated
by the lemma of Berger, Scott, and Strang [1972]. The term for the approximation
error is the crucial one. Let P h : H 2 () H 0 () X h be an interpolation
operator. It is sufficient to make provision for
v P h v 1 +
div v
div h v 0 ch v 2 ,
div h v h 0 c v h 1 for all v h X h .
These inequalities are clear for the model problem in (3.35). Moreover, let the
mesh-dependent bilinear form a h be defined by polarization of the quadratic form
in (3.36). It follows from Lemma 3.10 that we have for w h X h
a h (u P h u, w h ) = µ(ε(u P h u), ε(w h )) 0 + λ( div u
div h u, div h w h ) 0 ,
ch u 2 w h 1 + ch u 2
div h w h 0 ,
ch u 2 w h 1 .
Finally, the consistency error is given by the term λ( div u
div h u, div h w h ) 0 .An
estimate of this expression is already included in the formula above, and we have
a robust estimate with a constant c that does not depend on λ , namely
u u h 1 ch f 0 .
The following theory describes why uniform convergence cannot be expected
with some discretizations. The equation (3.29) is included as a special case if we
set X :
= H 1 () , a 0 (u, v) :
div v , and t 2
=
2 µ(ε(u), ε(v)) 0 , Bv :
=
=
1 .
Search WWH ::




Custom Search