Calcolo

, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp 531–562 | Cite as

Quasi-optimal convergence rates for adaptive boundary element methods with data approximation, part I: weakly-singular integral equation

  • Michael Feischl
  • Thomas Führer
  • Michael Karkulik
  • Jens Markus Melenk
  • Dirk Praetorius
Article

Abstract

We analyze an adaptive boundary element method for Symm’s integral equation in 2D and 3D which incorporates the approximation of the Dirichlet data \(g\) into the adaptive scheme. We prove quasi-optimal convergence rates for any \(H^{1/2}\)-stable projection used for data approximation.

Keywords

Boundary element method Weakly-singular integral equation  A posteriori error estimate Adaptive algorithm  Convergence Optimality 

Mathematics Subject Classification

65N30 65N38 65N50 65R20 41A25 

References

  1. 1.
    Aurada, M., Feischl, M., Führer, T., Karkulik, M., Praetorius, D.: Efficiency and optimality of some weighted-residual error estimator for adaptive 2D boundary element methods. Comput. Methods Appl. Math. 13, 305–332 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aurada, M., Feischl, M., Führer, T., Melenk, J., Praetorius, D.: Inverse estimates for elliptic boundary integral operators and their application to the adaptive coupling of FEM and BEM. ASC Report 07/2012. Institute for Analysis and Scientific Computing, Vienna University of Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aurada, M., Feischl, M., Kemetmüller, J., Page, M., Praetorius, D.: Each \(H^{1/2}\)-stable projection yields convergence and quasi-optimality of adaptive FEM with inhomogeneous Dirichlet data in \({\mathbb{R}}^d\). Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 47, 1207–1235 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aurada, M., Ferraz-Leite, S., Goldenits, P., Karkulik, M., Mayr, M., Praetorius, D.: Convergence of adaptive BEM for some mixed boundary value problem. Appl. Numer. Math. 62(4), 226–245 (2012)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aurada, M., Ferraz-Leite, S., Praetorius, D.: Estimator reduction and convergence of adaptive BEM. Appl. Numer. Math. 62(6), 787–801 (2012)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Binev, P., Dahmen, W., DeVore, R.: Adaptive finite element methods with convergence rates. Numer. Math. 97(2), 219–268 (2004)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carstensen, C.: An a posteriori error estimate for a first-kind integral equation. Math. Comp. 66(217), 139–155 (1997)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carstensen, C., Maischak, M., Stephan, E.P.: A posteriori error estimate and \(h\)-adaptive algorithm on surfaces for Symm’s integral equation. Numer. Math. 90(2), 197–213 (2001)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carstensen, C., Praetorius, D.: Averaging techniques for the a posteriori BEM error control for a hypersingular integral equation in two dimensions. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 29(2), 782–810 (2007) (electronic)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carstensen, C., Stephan, E.P.: A posteriori error estimates for boundary element methods. Math. Comp. 64(210), 483–500 (1995)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cascon, J.M., Kreuzer, C., Nochetto, R.H., Siebert, K.G.: Quasi-optimal convergence rate for an adaptive finite element method. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 46(5), 2524–2550 (2008)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dörfler, W.: A convergent adaptive algorithm for Poisson’s equation. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 33(3), 1106–1124 (1996)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Erath, C., Funken, S., Goldenits, P., Praetorius, D.: Simple error estimators for the Galerkin BEM for some hypersingular integral equation in 2D. Appl. Anal. 92, 1194–1216 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Feischl, M., Führer, T., Praetorius, D.: Adaptive FEM with optimal convergence rates for a certain class of non-symmetric and possibly non-linear problems. ASC Report 43/2012. Institute for Analysis and Scientific Computing, Vienna University of Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feischl, M., Karkulik, M., Melenk, J., Praetorius, D.: Quasi-optimal convergence rate for an adaptive boundary element method. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 51, 1327–1348 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feischl, M., Page, M., Praetorius, D.: Convergence and quasi-optimality of adaptive FEM with inhomogeneous Dirichlet data. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 255, 481–501 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Graham, I.G., Hackbusch, W., Sauter, S.A.: Finite elements on degenerate meshes: inverse-type inequalities and applications. IMA J. Numer. Anal. 25(2), 379–407 (2005)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hsiao, G.C., Wendland, W.L.: Boundary integral equations. In: Applied Mathematical Sciences, vol. 164. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karkulik, M.: Zur Konvergenz und Quasioptimalität adaptiver Randelementmethoden. Ph.D. thesis. TU Wien, 2013 (in German)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Karkulik, M., Of, G., Praetorius, D.: Convergence of adaptive 3D BEM for weakly singular integral equations based on isotropic mesh-refinement. Numer. Methods Partial Differ. Equ. (2013, in print)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Karkulik, M., Pavlicek, D., Praetorius, D.: On 2D newest vertex bisection: Optimality of mesh-closure and \(H^1\)-stability of \(L_2\)-projection. Constr. Approx. 38, 213–234 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maischak, M.: The analytical computation of the Galerkin elements for the Laplace, Lamé and Helmholtz equation in 2D-BEM. Institute for Applied Mathematics, University of Hanover, Preprint (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McLean, W.: Strongly elliptic systems and boundary integral equations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sauter, S.A., Schwab, C.: Boundary element methods. In: Springer Series in Computational Mathematics, vol. 39. Springer, Berlin (2011). Translated and expanded from the 2004 German originalGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Scott, L.R., Zhang, S.: Finite element interpolation of nonsmooth functions satisfying boundary conditions. Math. Comp. 54(190), 483–493 (1990)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stevenson, R.: Optimality of a standard adaptive finite element method. Found. Comput. Math. 7(2), 245–269 (2007)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stevenson, R.: The completion of locally refined simplicial partitions created by bisection. Math. Comp. 77(261), 227–241 (2008)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tsogtgerel, G.: Adaptive boundary element methods with convergence rates. Numer. Math. 124(3), 471–516 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verfürth, R.: A review of a posteriori error estimation and adaptive mesh-refinement techniques. Teubner, Stuttgart (1996)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Feischl
    • 1
  • Thomas Führer
    • 1
  • Michael Karkulik
    • 2
  • Jens Markus Melenk
    • 1
  • Dirk Praetorius
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Analysis and Scientific ComputingVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria
  2. 2.Departamento de MatemáticasPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations