2021
DOI: 10.1515/cmam-2020-0123
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Poincaré Inequality for a Mesh-Dependent 2-Norm on Piecewise Linear Surfaces with Boundary

Abstract: We establish several useful estimates for a non-conforming 2-norm posed on piecewise linear surface triangulations with boundary, with the main result being a Poincaré inequality. We also obtain equivalence of the non-conforming 2-norm posed on the true surface with the norm posed on a piecewise linear approximation. Moreover, we allow for free boundary conditions. The true surface is assumed to be C … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 40 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, for piecewise constant Regge metrics in dimension N = 2, we show that convergence of (Rω) dist (g h ) to (Rω)(g) holds in the H −2 (Ω)-norm for any optimalorder interpolant of g, but numerical experiments suggest that it fails to hold in stronger norms when g h is not the canonical interpolant of g. A key tool that we use to prove convergence in H −2 (Ω) is the near-equivalence of a certain pair of metric-dependent, mesh-dependent norms on V ; see Proposition 4.5. This equivalence is similar to one that Walker [27,Theorems 4.1 and 4.3] proved for an analogous family of mesh-dependent norms on triangulated surfaces.…”
Section: Notationsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…For example, for piecewise constant Regge metrics in dimension N = 2, we show that convergence of (Rω) dist (g h ) to (Rω)(g) holds in the H −2 (Ω)-norm for any optimalorder interpolant of g, but numerical experiments suggest that it fails to hold in stronger norms when g h is not the canonical interpolant of g. A key tool that we use to prove convergence in H −2 (Ω) is the near-equivalence of a certain pair of metric-dependent, mesh-dependent norms on V ; see Proposition 4.5. This equivalence is similar to one that Walker [27,Theorems 4.1 and 4.3] proved for an analogous family of mesh-dependent norms on triangulated surfaces.…”
Section: Notationsupporting
confidence: 77%