2014
DOI: 10.1051/m2an/2014014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adaptive mesh refinement strategy for a non conservative transport problem

Abstract: ABSTRACT. In the framework of transport equations it is usual to need long time simulations, and therefore large physical domains to cover a phenomenon. On the other hand it can happen that only a small time varying portion of the domain is interesting. This motivates the use of adaptivity for the spatial discretization. Biological models involving cell development are often nonconservative to account for cell division. In that case the threshold controlling the spatial adaptivity may have to be time-dependent… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the one hand, existence and uniqueness of the solution in our case is proven for bounded initial conditions, and hence as well the existence of zeroth and first order moments [30]. On the other hand, the same asymptotic behavior as in the smooth velocity case [26], tending towards a monokinetic distribution, is observed in numerical simulations [2,4]. Nevertheless, we will show that if we relax the hypotheses made in [26] on the velocity field, the reduced model can have only measure solutions in some cases, and is therefore of little use for practical and numerical purposes, while in other cases the monokinetic behavior [26] is preserved.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…On the one hand, existence and uniqueness of the solution in our case is proven for bounded initial conditions, and hence as well the existence of zeroth and first order moments [30]. On the other hand, the same asymptotic behavior as in the smooth velocity case [26], tending towards a monokinetic distribution, is observed in numerical simulations [2,4]. Nevertheless, we will show that if we relax the hypotheses made in [26] on the velocity field, the reduced model can have only measure solutions in some cases, and is therefore of little use for practical and numerical purposes, while in other cases the monokinetic behavior [26] is preserved.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…We know from Theorem 3.1 that any solution (ζ,ρ) defines a particular solution of the 2D model using the mono kinetic ansatz (2.22). Furthermore, Theorem 3.3 ensures that for long time, the support of the 2D solution should remain bounded in the y direction by the solutions ζ i (t, x), corresponding to some s = ζ 0 i , i = 0, 1 which can be deduced from the values of t s and ζ s i for i = 0, 1 defined in the proof of Theorem 3.3 4 . In this section we illustrate that in practice the comparison between the 2D and 1D model is quite robust quantitatively and satisfies the following properties …”
Section: Numerical Comparison Of the Reduced 1d Model With The 2d Modelmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations