Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An automated approach for parallel adjoint-based error estimation and mesh adaptation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In finite element simulations, not all of the data are of equal importance. In fact, the primary purpose of a numerical study is often to accurately assess only one or two engineering output quantities that can be expressed as functionals. Adjoint-based error estimation provides a means to approximate the discretization error in functional quantities and mesh adaptation provides the ability to control this discretization error by locally modifying the finite element mesh. In the past, adjoint-based error estimation has only been accessible to expert practitioners in the field of solid mechanics. In this work, we present an approach to automate the process of adjoint-based error estimation and mesh adaptation on parallel machines. This process is intended to lower the barrier of entry to adjoint-based error estimation and mesh adaptation for solid mechanics practitioners. We demonstrate that this approach is effective for example problems in Poisson’s equation, nonlinear elasticity, and thermomechanical elastoplasticity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ainsworth M, Oden JT (2011) A posteriori error estimation in finite element analysis. Wiley, Hoboken

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Alauzet F, Li X, Seol ES, Shephard MS (2006) Parallel anisotropic 3D mesh adaptation by mesh modification. Eng Comput 21(3):247–258

    Google Scholar 

  3. Babuška I, Miller A (1984) The post-processing approach in the finite element method, Part 1: calculation of displacements, stresses and other higher derivatives of the displacements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 20(6):1085–1109

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Babuška I, Miller A (1984) The post-processing approach in the finite element method, Part 2: the calculation of stress intensity factors. Int J Numer Methods Eng 20(6):1111–1129

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Babuška I, Miller A (1984) The post-processing approach in the finite element method, Part 3: a posteriori error estimates and adaptive mesh selection. Int J Numer Methods Eng 20(12):2311–2324

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bangerth W (2017) Deal ii step 14. https://www.dealii.org/current/doxygen/deal.II/step_14.html

  7. Bavier E, Hoemmen M, Rajamanickam S, Thornquist H (2012) Amesos2 and Belos: direct and iterative solvers for large sparse linear systems. Sci Progr 20(3):241–255

    Google Scholar 

  8. Becker R, Rannacher R (2001) An optimal control approach to a posteriori error estimation in finite element methods. Acta Numerica 10:1–102

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Bloomfield MO, Li Z, Granzow B, Ibanez DA, Oberai AA, Hansen GA, Liu XH, Shephard MS (2017) Component-based workflows for parallel thermomechanical analysis of arrayed geometries. Eng Comput 33(3):509–517

    Google Scholar 

  10. Boussetta R, Coupez T, Fourment L (2006) Adaptive remeshing based on a posteriori error estimation for forging simulation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195(48):6626–6645

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Burstedde C, Ghattas O, Stadler G, Tu T, Wilcox LC (2009) Parallel scalable adjoint-based adaptive solution of variable-viscosity stokes flow problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198(21):1691–1700

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Cyr EC, Shadid J, Wildey T (2014) Approaches for adjoint-based a posteriori analysis of stabilized finite element methods. SIAM J. Sci Comput 36(2):A766–A791

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Diamond G, Smith CW, Shephard MS (2017) Dynamic load balancing of massively parallel unstructured meshes. In: Proc. of the 8th Workshop on Latest Advances in Scalable Algorithms for Large-Scale Systems, Denver, CO, USA. Denver, CO, USA

  14. Dong L, Oberai AA (2017) Recovery of cellular traction in three-dimensional nonlinear hyperelastic matrices. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 314:296–313

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Eriksson K, Estep D, Hansbo P, Johnshon C (1996) Computational differential equations, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fidkowski KJ (2011) Output error estimation strategies for discontinuous galerkin discretizations of unsteady convection-dominated flows. Int J Numer Methods Eng 88(12):1297–1322

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Fidkowski KJ, Darmofal DL (2011) Review of output-based error estimation and mesh adaptation in computational fluid dynamics. AIAA J 49(4):673–694

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gartland EC Jr (1984) Computable pointwise error bounds and the ritz method in one dimension. SIAM J Numer Anal 21(1):84–100

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghorashi SS, Rabczuk T (2017) Goal-oriented error estimation and mesh adaptivity in 3D elastoplasticity problems. Int J Fract 203:3–19

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ghorashi SS, Amani J, Bagherzadeh AS, Rabczuk T (2014) Goal-oriented error estimation and mesh adaptivity in three-dimensional elasticity problems. In: WCCM XI-ECCM V-ECFD VI, Barcelona, Spain, Barcelona, Spain

  21. Giles MB, Pierce NA (2016) Chapter 2—adjoint error correction for integral outputs. Springer, Berlin, pp 47–95

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. González-Estrada OA, Nadal E, Ródenas JJ, Kerfriden P, Bordas SP-A, Fuenmayor FJ (2014) Mesh adaptivity driven by goal-oriented locally equilibrated superconvergent patch recovery. Comput Mech 53(5):957–976

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Granzow BN (2017) Goal GitHub repository. https://github.com/bgranzow/goal

  24. Granzow BN, Oberai AA, Shephard MS (2018) Adjoint-based error estimation and mesh adaptation for stabilized finite deformation elasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 337:263–280

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Granzow BN, Shephard MS, Oberai AA (2017) Output-based error estimation and mesh adaptation for variational multiscale methods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 322:441–459

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Grätsch T, Bathe K-J (2005) A posteriori error estimation techniques in practical finite element analysis. Comput Struct 83(4–5):235–265

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Griewank A, Walther A (2008) Evaluating derivatives: principles and techniques of algorithmic differentiation. Soc Ind Appl Math, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2 edition

  28. Heroux MA, Bartlett RA, Howle VE, Hoekstra RJ, Hu JJ, Kolda TG et al (2005) An overview of the Trilinos project. ACM Trans Math Softw 31(3):397–423

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Heroux MA, Willenbring JM (2012) A new overview of the Trilinos project. Sci Program 20(2):83–88

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ibanez D, Shephard MS (2017) Modifiable array data structures for mesh topology. SIAM J Sci Comput 39(2):C144–C161

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Ibanez DA, Seol ES, Smith CW, Shephard MS (2016) PUMI: Parallel unstructured mesh infrastructure. ACM Trans Math Softw 42(3):17–45

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Larsson F, Hansbo P, Runesson K (2002) Strategies for computing goal-oriented a posteriori error measures in non-linear elasticity. Int J Numer Methods Eng 55(8):879–894

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Li X, Shephard MS, Beall MW (2005) 3D anisotropic mesh adaptation by mesh modification. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(48):4915–4950

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Li Z, Bloomfield MO, Oberai AA. Simulation of finite-strain inelastic phenomena governed by creep and plasticity. Comput. Mechanics (to be published)

  35. Logg A, Mardal KA, Garth Wells (2012) Automated solution of differential equations by the finite element method: the FEniCS book. Springer, Heidelberg

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Nemec M, Aftosmis MJ (2007) Adjoint error estimation and adaptive refinement for embedded-boundary Cartesian meshes. In: 18th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conf., Miami, FL, USA, Miami, FL, USA

  37. Oden JT, Prudhomme S (2001) Goal-oriented error estimation and adaptivity for the finite element method. Comput Math Appl 41(5–6):735–756

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Pawlowski RP, Phipps ET, Salinger AG (2012) Automating embedded analysis capabilities and managing software complexity in multiphysics simulation, Part I: Template-based generic programming. Sci Program 20(2):197–219

    Google Scholar 

  39. Pawlowski RP, Phipps ET, Salinger AG, Owen SJ, Siefert CM, Staten ML (2012) Automating embedded analysis capabilities and managing software complexity in multiphysics simulation, Part II: application to partial differential equations. Sci Program 20(3):327–345

    Google Scholar 

  40. Phipps E, Pawlowski R (2012) Efficient expression templates for operator overloading-based automatic differentiation. In: Recent advances in algorithmic differentiation. Springer, Berlin, pp 309–319

  41. Prokopenko A, Hu JJ, Wiesner TA, Siefert CM, Tuminaro RS (2014) MueLu user’s guide 1.0. Technical Report SAND2014-18874, Sandia Nat. Lab., Albuquerque, NM, USA

  42. Prudhomme S, Oden JT (1999) On goal-oriented error estimation for elliptic problems: application to the control of pointwise errors. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 176(1–4):313–331

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Rabizadeh E, Bagherzadeh AS, Rabczuk T (2015) Adaptive thermo-mechanical finite element formulation based on goal-oriented error estimation. Comput Mater Sci 102:27–44

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ramesh B, Maniatty AM (2005) Stabilized finite element formulation for elastic–plastic finite deformations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(6):775–800

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Rannacher R, Suttmeier F-T (1997) A feed-back approach to error control in finite element methods: application to linear elasticity. Comput Mech 19(5):434–446

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Rannacher R, Suttmeier F-T (1998) A posteriori error control in finite element methods via duality techniques: application to perfect plasticity. Comput Mech 21(2):123–133

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Rannacher R, Suttmeier F-T (1999) A posteriori error estimation and mesh adaptation for finite element models in elasto-plasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 176(1–4):333–361

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Richardson LF (1911) The approximate arithmetical solution by finite differences of physical problems involving differential equations, with an application to the stresses in a masonry dam. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 210:307–357

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Richter T, Wick T (2015) Variational localizations of the dual weighted residual estimator. J Comput Appl Math 279:192–208

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Rognes ME, Logg A (2013) Automated goal-oriented error control I: stationary variational problems. SIAM J Sci Comput 35(3):C173–C193

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Salinger AG, Bartett RA, Chen Q, Gao X, Hansen G, Kalashnikova I, Mota A, Muller RP, Nielsen E, Ostien J et al (2013) Albany: a component-based partial differential equation code built on trilinos. Technical Report SAND2013-8430J, Sandia Nat. Lab., Albuquerque, NM, USA

  52. Simo JC, Hughes TJR (2006) Computational inelasticity. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Smith CW, Granzow B, Ibanez D, Sahni O, Jansen KE, Shephard MS (2016) In-memory integration of existing software components for parallel adaptive unstructured mesh workflows. In: Proc. of the XSEDE16 Conf. on Diversity, Big Data, and Science at Scale, Miami, FL, USA. Miami, FL, USA

  54. Smith CW, Rasquin M, Ibanez D, Jansen KE, Shephard MS (2018) Improving unstructured mesh partitions for multiple criteria using mesh adjacencies. SIAM J Sci Comput 40:C47–C75

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  55. Stein E, Rüter M, Ohnimus S (2007) Error-controlled adaptive goal-oriented modeling and finite element approximations in elasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196(37):3598–3613

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  56. Taylor C, Hood P (1973) A numerical solution of the Navier-Stokes equations using the finite element technique. Comput Fluids 1(1):73–100

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Tezaur IK, Perego M, Salinger AG, Tuminaro RS, Price SF (2015) Albany/FELIX: a parallel, scalable and robust, finite element, first-order Stokes approximation ice sheet solver built for advanced analysis. Geosci Model Dev 8(4):1197–1220

    Google Scholar 

  58. Venditti DA, Darmofal DL (2000) Adjoint error estimation and grid adaptation for functional outputs: application to quasi-one-dimensional flow. J Comput Phys 164(1):204–227

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Venditti DA, Darmofal DL (2002) Grid adaptation for functional outputs: application to two-dimensional inviscid flows. J Comput Phys 176(1):40–69

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Venditti DA, Darmofal DL (2003) Anisotropic grid adaptation for functional outputs: application to two-dimensional viscous flows. J Comput Phys 187(1):22–46

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  61. Verfürth R (1994) A posteriori error estimation and adaptive mesh-refinement techniques. J Comput Appl Math 50(1–3):67–83

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  62. Whiteley JP, Tavener SJ (2014) Error estimation and adaptivity for incompressible hyperelasticity. Int Numer Methods Eng 99(5):313–332

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of IBM Corporation in the performance of this research. The computing resources of the Center for Computational Innovations at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute are also acknowledged. The development of tools used in this work was partly supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, under award DE-SC00066117 (FASTMath SciDAC Institute). The authors would like to thank Li Dong for providing the discrete geometric model used for the microglial cell example and Max Bloomfield for the geometric model used for the solder ball example.

This work was performed at the time at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute before the authors moved to different organizations. This paper describes objective technical results and analysis. Any subjective views or opinions that might be expressed in the paper do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the United States Government.

Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525.

This work is supported by the U.S. Army grants W911NF1410301 and W911NF16C0117.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sandia National Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM, 87185-1321, USA

    Brian N. Granzow

  2. Scientific Computation Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 110 8th Street, Troy, NY, 12180, USA

    Mark S. Shephard

  3. Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA

    Assad A. Oberai

Authors
  1. Brian N. Granzow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Assad A. Oberai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark S. Shephard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian N. Granzow.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Granzow, B.N., Oberai, A.A. & Shephard, M.S. An automated approach for parallel adjoint-based error estimation and mesh adaptation. Engineering with Computers 36, 1169–1188 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00890-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00890-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation