2006
DOI: 10.1002/nme.1828
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discontinuous Galerkin framework for adaptive solution of parabolic problems

Abstract: SUMMARYNon-conforming meshes are frequently employed in adaptive analyses and simulations of multi-component systems. We develop a discontinuous Galerkin formulation for the discretization of parabolic problems that weakly enforces continuity across non-conforming mesh interfaces. A benefit of the DG scheme is that it does not introduce constraint equations and their resulting Lagrange multiplier fields as done in mixed and mortar methods. The salient features of the formulation are highlighted through an a pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
(77 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Any other choice of gives rise to an implicit scheme such as the unconditionally stable second-order accurate midpoint rule with = 1 2 or the unconditionally stable backward Euler scheme with = 1. In a monolithic approach as in [23], the discrete equation (20) is solved for v n+1 after which u n+1 is evaluated using (21).…”
Section: Semi-discrete Formmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Any other choice of gives rise to an implicit scheme such as the unconditionally stable second-order accurate midpoint rule with = 1 2 or the unconditionally stable backward Euler scheme with = 1. In a monolithic approach as in [23], the discrete equation (20) is solved for v n+1 after which u n+1 is evaluated using (21).…”
Section: Semi-discrete Formmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the first successful applications of DG formulation to solve a practical problem was by [Reed and Hill, 1973], which addressed neutron transport. Over the years, DG methods have been successfully employed to solve hyperbolic PDEs [Brezzi et al, 2004;Pal et al, 2016], elliptic PDEs [Arnold et al, 2002;Barrios and Bustinzal, 2007;Cockburn et al, 2009b;Douglas and Dupont, 1976;Rivière et al, 1999;Rusten et al, 1996], parabolic PDEs [Douglas and Dupont, 1976;Kulkarni et al, 2007], coupling algorithms [Nakshatrala et al, 2009] and space-time finite elements [Abedi et al, 2006;Palaniappan et al, 2004]. Several variants of DG formulations have been developed over the years with varying merits for each variant.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%