Advertisement

Which Meshes Are Better Conditioned: Adaptive, Uniform, Locally Refined or Locally Adjusted?

  • Sanjay Kumar Khattri
  • Gunnar Fladmark
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3992)

Abstract

Adaptive, locally refined and locally adjusted meshes are preferred over uniform meshes for capturing singular or localised solutions. Roughly speaking, for a given degree of freedom a solution associated with adaptive, locally refined and locally adjusted meshes is more accurate than the solution given by uniform meshes. In this work, we answer the question which meshes are better conditioned. We found, for approximately same degree of freedom (same size of matrix), it is easier to solve a system of equations associated with an adaptive mesh.

Keywords

Conjugate Gradient Matrix System Small Eigenvalue Adaptive Mesh Uniform Mesh 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Aavatsmark, I.: An introduction to multipoint flux approximations for quadrilateral grids. Comput. Geosci. 6(3-4), 405–432 (2002)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carpentieri, B., Duff, I.S., Giraud, L.: A Class of Spectral Two-Level Preconditioners. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 25(2), 749–765 (2003)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ewing, R.E., Lazarov, R.D., Vassilevski, P.S.: Local refinement techniques for elliptic problems on cell-centered grids. I. Error analysis. Math. Comp. 56(194), 437–461 (1991)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Giraud, L., Ruiz, D., Touhami, A.: A comparative study of iterative solvers exploiting spectral information for SPD systems. Technical Report TR/PA/04/40, CERFACS, Toulouse, France (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Khattri, S.K.: Numerical Tools for Multiphase, Multicomponent, Reactive Transport. Flow of CO2 in Porous Medium. PhD Thesis, The University of Bergen, Norway (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Strang, G., Fix, G.J.: An analysis of the finite element method, vol. 1. Wiley, New York (1973)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Süli, E.: Convergence of finite volume schemes for Poisson’s equation on nonuniform meshes. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 28(5), 1419–1430 (1991)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weiser, A., Wheeler, M.F.: On convergence of block-centered finite differences for elliptic-problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 25(2), 351–375 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjay Kumar Khattri
    • 1
  • Gunnar Fladmark
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of BergenNorway

Personalised recommendations