Applications of Mathematics

, Volume 60, Issue 3, pp 265–283 | Cite as

2-Dimensional primal domain decomposition theory in detail

  • Dalibor Lukáš
  • Jiří Bouchala
  • Petr Vodstrčil
  • Lukáš Malý
Article
  • 50 Downloads

Abstract

We give details of the theory of primal domain decomposition (DD) methods for a 2-dimensional second order elliptic equation with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions and jumping coefficients. The problem is discretized by the finite element method. The computational domain is decomposed into triangular subdomains that align with the coefficients jumps. We prove that the condition number of the vertex-based DD preconditioner is O((1 + log(H/h))2), independently of the coefficient jumps, where H and h denote the discretization parameters of the coarse and fine triangulations, respectively. Although this preconditioner and its analysis date back to the pioneering work J.H.Bramble, J. E.Pasciak, A.H. Schatz (1986), and it was revisited and extended by many authors including M.Dryja, O.B.Widlund (1990) and A.Toselli, O.B.Widlund (2005), the theory is hard to understand and some details, to our best knowledge, have never been published. In this paper we present all the proofs in detail by means of fundamental calculus.

Keywords

domain decomposition method finite element method preconditioning 

MSC 2010

65N55 65N30 65F08 

References

  1. [1]
    J. H. Bramble, J. E. Pasciak, A. H. Schatz: The construction of preconditioners for elliptic problems by substructuring. I. Math. Comput. 47 (1986), 103–134.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Dryja, B. F. Smith, O. B. Widlund: Schwarz analysis of iterative substructuring algorithms for elliptic problems in three dimensions. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 31 (1994), 1662–1694.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Dryja, O. B. Widlund: Some domain decomposition algorithms for elliptic problems. Iterative Methods for Large Linear Systems. Austin, TX, 1988. Academic Press, Boston, 1990, pp. 273–291.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    C. Farhat, F.-X. Roux: A method of finite element tearing and interconnecting and its parallel solution algorithm. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 32 (1991), 1205–1227.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. George: Nested dissection of a regular finite element mesh. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 10 (1973), 345–363.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Mandel, M. Brezina: Balancing domain decomposition for problems with large jumps in coefficients. Math. Comput. 65 (1996), 1387–1401.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Mandel, R. Tezaur: Convergence of a substructuring method with Lagrange multipliers. Numer. Math. 73 (1996), 473–487.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    L. E. Payne, H. F. Weinberger: An optimal Poincaré inequality for convex domains. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 5 (1960), 286–292.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. Toselli, O. Widlund: Domain Decomposition Methods—Algorithms and Theory. Springer Series in Computational Mathematics 34, Springer, Berlin, 2005.MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Mathematics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dalibor Lukáš
    • 1
  • Jiří Bouchala
    • 1
  • Petr Vodstrčil
    • 1
  • Lukáš Malý
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceVŠB-Technical University of OstravaOstrava-PorubaCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations