Journal of Scientific Computing

, Volume 60, Issue 2, pp 313–344 | Cite as

Optimal Strong-Stability-Preserving Runge–Kutta Time Discretizations for Discontinuous Galerkin Methods

  • Ethan J. KubatkoEmail author
  • Benjamin A. Yeager
  • David I. Ketcheson


Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) spatial discretizations are often used in a method-of-lines approach with explicit strong-stability-preserving (SSP) Runge–Kutta (RK) time steppers for the numerical solution of hyperbolic conservation laws. The time steps that are employed in this type of approach must satisfy Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy stability constraints that are dependent on both the region of absolute stability and the SSP coefficient of the RK method. While existing SSPRK methods have been optimized with respect to the latter, it is in fact the former that gives rise to stricter constraints on the time step in the case of RKDG stability. Therefore, in this work, we present the development of new “DG-optimized” SSPRK methods with stability regions that have been specifically designed to maximize the stable time step size for RKDG methods of a given order in one space dimension. These new methods represent the best available RKDG methods in terms of computational efficiency, with significant improvements over methods using existing SSPRK time steppers that have been optimized with respect to SSP coefficients. Second-, third-, and fourth-order methods with up to eight stages are presented, and their stability properties are verified through application to numerical test cases.


Discontinuous Galerkin Runge–Kutta Strong-stability-preserving 



The first and second author acknowledge support by National Science Foundation Grants DMS-0915118 and DMS-1217218.


  1. 1.
    Butcher, J.C.: Numerical Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng, Y., Li, F., Qiu, J., Xu, L.: Positivity-preserving DG and central DG methods for ideal MHD equations. J. Comput. Phys. 238, 255–280 (2013)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cockburn, B., Shu, C.W.: The Runge–Kutta local projection \({P}^1\)-discontinuous Galerkin finite element method for scalar conservation laws. Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 25(3), 337–361 (1989)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cockburn, B., Shu, C.W.: TVB Runge–Kutta local projection discontinuous Galerkin finite element method for scalar conservation laws II: general framework. Math. Comput. 52, 411–435 (1989)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cockburn, B., Shu, C.W.: Runge–Kutta discontinuous Galerkin methods for convection-dominated problems. J. Sci. Comput. 16(3), 173–261 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Constantinescu, E.M.: Multirate timestepping methods. J. Sci. Comput. 33, 239–278 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dawson, C., Trahan, C.J., Kubatko, E.J., Westerink, J.J.: A parallel local timestepping Runge–Kutta discontinuous Galerkin method with applications to coastal ocean modeling. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 259(1), 154–165 (2013)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gottlieb, S., Ketcheson, D., Shu, C.W.: Strong Stability Preserving Runge-Kutta and Multistep Time Discretizations. World Scientific, Singapore (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gottlieb, S., Shu, C.W.: Total variation diminishing Runge–Kutta schemes. Math. Comput. 67, 73–85 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gottlieb, S., Shu, C.W.: Strong stability preserving properties of Runge–Kutta time discretization methods for linear constant coefficient operators. J. Sci. Comput. 18(1), 83–109 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gottlieb, S., Shu, C.W., Tadmor, E.: Strong stability-preserving high-order time discretization methods. SIAM Rev. 43(1), 89–112 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grant, M., Boyd, S.: Graph implementations for nonsmooth convex programs. In: Blondel, V., Boyd, S., Kimura, H. (eds.) Recent Advances in Learning and Control, Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences, pp. 95–110. Springer, Berlin (2008).
  13. 13.
    Grant, M., Boyd, S.: CVX: Matlab Software for Disciplined Convex Programming, version 2.0 beta (2012).
  14. 14.
    Harten, A.: High resolution schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws. J. Comput. Phys. 49, 357–393 (1983)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Higueras, I.: Representations of Runge–Kutta methods and strong stability preserving methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 43(3), 924–948 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jeltsch, R., Nevanlinna, O.: Largest disk of stability of explicit Runge–Kutta methods. BIT Numer. Math. 18, 500–502 (1978)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ketcheson, D.I.: Highly efficient strong stability preserving Runge–Kutta methods with low-storage implementations. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 30(4), 2113–2136 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ketcheson, D.I., Ahmadia, A.: Optimal stability polynomials for numerical integration of initial value problems. Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 7(2), 247–271 (2013)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kinnmark, I.P., Gray, W.G.: One step integration methods with maximum stability regions. Math. Comput. Simul. 26, 87–92 (1984)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kubatko, E.J., Bunya, S., Dawson, C., Westerink, J.J.: Dynamic p-adaptive Runge–Kutta discontinuous Galerkin methods for the shallow water equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 198, 1766–1774 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kubatko, E.J., Westerink, J.J., Dawson, C.: Semidiscrete discontinuous Galerkin methods and stage exceeding order strong stability preserving Runge–Kutta time discretizations. J. Comput. Phys. 222, 832–848 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mirabito, C., Dawson, C., Kubatko, E.J., Westerink, J.J., Bunya, S.: Implementation of a discontinuous Galerkin morphological model on two-dimensional unstructured meshes. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 200, 189–207 (2011)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parsani, M., Ketcheson, D.I.: Design of optimal explicit linearly stable strong stability preserving Runge–Kutta schemes for the spectral difference method. In : International Conference on Spectral and High Order Methods (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parsani, M., Ketcheson, D.I., Deconinck, W.: Optimized explicit Runge–Kutta schemes for the spectral difference method applied to wave propagation problems. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 35(2), A957–A986 (2013)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reddy, S.C., Trefethen, L.N.: Stability of the method of lines. Numerische Mathematik 62, 235–267 (1992)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ruuth, S.J.: Global optimization of explicit strong-stability-preserving Runge–Kutta methods. Math. Comput. 75, 183–207 (2006)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Spiteri, R.J., Ruuth, S.J.: A new class of optimal high-order strong-stability-preserving time discretization methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 40, 469–491 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Spiteri, R.J., Ruuth, S.J.: Non-linear evolution using optimal fourth-order strong-stability-preserving Runge–Kutta methods. Math. Comput. Simul. 62, 125–135 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sun, T., Qiu, J.: LWDG method for a multi-class traffic flow model on an inhomogeneous highway. Adv. Appl. Math. Mech. 1(3), 438–450 (2009)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Toulorge, T., Desmet, W.: Optimal Runge–Kutta schemes for discontinuous Galerkin space discretizations applied to wave propagation problems. J. Comput. Phys. 231(4), 2067–2091 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Trahan, C.J., Dawson, C.: Local time-stepping in Runge–Kutta discontinuous Galerkin finite element methods applied to the shallow-water equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 217, 139–152 (2012)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van der Houwen, P.: Explicit Runge–Kutta formulas with increased stability boundaries. Numerische Mathematik 20, 149–164 (1972)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vichnevetsky, R.: New stability theorems concerning one-step numerical methods for ordinary differential equations. Math. Comput. Simul. 25, 199–205 (1983)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Williamson, J.H.: Low-storage Runge–Kutta schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 35, 48–56 (1980)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xing, Y., Shu, C.W.: High order well-balanced finite volume WENO schemes and discontinuous Galerkin methods for a class of hyperbolic systems with source terms. J. Comput. Phys. 214, 567–598 (2010)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xing, Y., Zhang, X., Shu, C.W.: Positivity-preserving high order well-balanced discontinuous Galerkin methods for the shallow water equations. Adv. Water Resour. 33, 1476–1493 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ethan J. Kubatko
    • 1
    Email author
  • Benjamin A. Yeager
    • 1
  • David I. Ketcheson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geodetic EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Division of Mathematical and Computer Sciences and Engineering4700 King Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyThuwalSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations