Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 169 Frank H. T. Rhodes Hall Cornell University Ithaca,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 169 Frank H. T. Rhodes Hall Cornell University Ithaca,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 169 Frank H. T. Rhodes Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-3801 Email: zabaras@cornell.edu, bnv2@cornell.edu URL: http://mpdc.mae.cornell.edu/ BADRI VELAMUR ASOKAN and NICHOLAS ZABARAS STOCHASTIC VARIATIONAL MULTISCALE METHOD FOR ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS WITH MULTISCALE COEFFICIENTS

2 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory OUTLINE  Current techniques for multiscale elliptic equations  Variational multiscale [VMS] method  Generalized polynomial chaos approach  Deterministic VMS modeling of multiscale elliptic equation  Issues in extension of approach to stochastic elliptic equation  Presentation of subgrid problems  Numerical examples  Extensions to practical systems – A brief discussion

3 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory CURRENT TECHNIQUES  Stochastic VMS [Zabaras et al. JCP 208(1), 2005]  Residual-Free bubbles [Sangalli, SIAM MMS 1(3), 2003]  Adaptive variational multiscale method [Larson, Chalmers finite element preprints 2004-18, 2004-11]  Variational multiscale method [Arbogast, SIAM J.Num.Anal 42, 2004], [Arbogast, SPE J., Dec 2002]  Multiscale finite elements [Hou, JCP 134, 1997], [Hou, JCP, 2005]  Heterogeneous finite element method [Xu, J. Am. Math, 2003]  Homogenization and allied techniques

4 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory MODEL MULTISCALE ELLIPTIC EQUATION Permeability of Upper Ness formation Domain Boundary in on  Multiple scale variations in K  K is inherently random [property predictions are at best statistical] Crystal microstructures  Composites  Diffusion processes

5 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC PROCESSES AS FUNCTIONS  A probability space is a triple comprising of collection of basis outcomes, permutation of these outcomes and a probability measure  A real-valued random variable is a function that maps the probability space to a real line [regions in go to intervals in the real line]  : Random variable  A space-time stochastic process is can be represented as + other regularity conditions

6 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SERIES REPRESENTATION [CONTD]  Karhunen-Loeve Stochastic process Mean function ON random variables Deterministic functions  Generalized polynomial chaos Stochastic process Askey polynomials in input Deterministic functions Stochastic input

7 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC VMS MODELING in on  K is spatially rapidly varying stochastic process [a multiscale diffusion coefficient] [V] Find such that, for all

8 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory VARIATIONAL MULTISCALE METHOD h Subgrid scale solution Coarse scale solution Actual solution  Hypothesis – Actual solution is a sum of coarse scale resolved part and a subgrid scale unresolved part [Hughes, 95]  This induces a similar decomposition of the governing equation into coarse and subgrid parts  Idea – Approximately solve the subgrid equations and include the effect on coarse scale equation  Highly successful with advection-diffusion problems, fluid- flow, micromechanics and other

9 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory VMS [VARIATIONAL FORMULATION] [V] Find such that, for all  [V] denotes the full variational formulation  U and V denote appropriate function spaces for the multiscale solution u and test function v respectively  VMS hypothesis:  Induced function space decomposition [Hughes 1995] Exact = coarse + fine

10 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory VMS [COARSE AND SUBGRID SCALES] Using and the induced function space decomposition Find such that, for all and Coarse [V] Subgrid [V]  Solve subgrid [V] using Greens' functions, PU and other  Substitute the subgrid solution in coarse [V]

11 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DEFINITIONS AND DISCRETIZATION  Since the subgrid solution u F represents rapid variations, more terms in GPCE is required  Let us now split the subgrid solution into two parts defined by the following equations Find such that, for all and Subgrid [V] Homogeneous [V] Affine [V]

12 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SOLUTION OF HOMOGENEOUS [V] Homogeneous [V]  This equation yields an approach similar to MsFEM technique for solving multiscale elliptic equations [Hou et al.]  By examination, is a map of the coarse solution on the subgrid scale  Since, represents subgrid variations, a higher order GPCE is used (leading to more terms in stochastic series expansion)

13 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory FINITE ELEMENT DISCRETIZATION Coarse mesh  Nel C elements Subgrid mesh  Nel F elements  Associated with each element sub-domain in the coarse mesh

14 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DEFINITIONS AND DISCRETIZATION  Assume a finite element discretization of the spatial region D into Nel C coarse elements  Each coarse element is further discretized by a subgrid mesh with Nel F elements  In each coarse element, the coarse solution u C can be approximated as nbf = number of spatial finite element basis functions in each coarse element P C = number of terms in the GPCE of coarse solution

15 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SOLUTION OF HOMOGENEOUS [V] CONTD  Considering the following finite element – GPCE representation for coarse solution u C  The subgrid solution can be represented as follows  Since represents subgrid variations, a nonlinear coarse scale mapping, a higher order GPCE is used [implies more terms in GPCE of ]

16 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SOLUTION OF HOMOGENEOUS [V] CONTD  Now, we have  Thus, we end up with Nmax homogeneous subgrid problems in each coarse element D (e)  Following representation is used for approximation nbf = number of spatial finite element basis functions in each element defined on the subgrid mesh P F = number of terms in the GPCE. Also, P F >P C

17 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory HOMOGENEOUS [V] BOUNDARY CONDITIONS Coarse element D (e) Subgrid mesh  Also, reduced problems are solved on element sides for obtaining oscillatory boundary conditions

18 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SOLVING REDUCED PROBLEM Subgrid mesh Mapping element edge s n  Each coarse element edge is mapped to a line grid  Line grid yields coordinates (s – along the line grid, n – normal to line grid)  The reduced problem specified below is solved on the line grid

19 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory FEM FOR HOMOGENEOUS [V]  Thus in each coarse element E C, we can solve for the subgrid basis functions as follows  Note that we solve for the sum of coarse + subgrid basis functions  The boundary conditions for this equation are obtained as the solution of the reduced problem on coarse element edges  DOF for the problem = (Nno-subgrid)(P F +1)

20 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory SOLUTION OF AFFINE [V] Affine [V]  This affine correction is unique to the VMS formulation [Arbogast et al.] and is not obtained in MsFEM type of formulations  Crucial in case of localized sources and sinks  Again, similar to the homogeneous [V], we have  This affine correction solution has no dependence on coarse scale behavior  We solve this equation on each coarse element with zero boundary conditions

21 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DESCRIPTION OF NUMERICAL PROBLEMS Coarse element D (e) Subgrid mesh  Based on boundary conditions used and subgrid problems solved, we have three studies MsFEM-LMsFEM-Os VMS-Os  Linear boundary conditions are used  No affine correction  Reduced solution as BC  No affine correction  Reduced solution as BC  Affine correction explicitly solved

22 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory NUMERICAL EXAMPLES  Deterministic studies  Case 1: Periodic media [single fast scale separation]  Case 2: non-periodic media [multiple scales]  Stochastic studies  Case 1: Pseudo-periodic media  Effect of P F -P C difference  Future studies and research directions

23 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE I] PERIODIC MEDIA  A 128x128 mesh for complete resolution  4-noded bilinear quads for FEM K [periodic] Coarse/ subgrid MsFEM-L [L2,Linf]x10 3 MsFEM-Os [L2,Linf] x10 3 VMS-Os [L2,Linf] x10 3 [4,32]1.09,2.020.89,1.670.36,1.34 [8,16]0.59,1.380.26,0.590.13,0.57 [16,8]0.79,1.740.12,0.590.09,0.57

24 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE I] RESULTS Resolved FEM MsFEM-L MsFEM-Os VMS-Os  coarse 8x8 subgrid 16x16 mesh  VMS yields consistent low error values

25 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE II] NON-PERIODIC MEDIA K [non-periodic]  Presence of multiple spatial scales  non-periodic spatial variation  vertices v 1 (0,0) v 2 (1,0) v 3 (0,1) v 4 (1,1)

26 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE II] NON-PERIODIC MEDIA  A 512x512 mesh for complete resolution  4-noded bilinear quads for FEM Coarse/ subgrid MsFEM-L [L2,Linf]x10 5 MsFEM-Os [L2,Linf] x10 5 VMS-Os [L2,Linf] x10 5 [32,16]2.18,6.320.33,5.50 [16,32]1.99,7.410.78,7.390.65,7.46 [8,64]3.10,12.52.12,16.712.5,9.97

27 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE II] RESULTS Resolved FEM MsFEM-L MsFEM-Os VMS-Os  coarse 16x16 subgrid 32x32 mesh  VMS yields consistent low error values

28 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC [CASE I] PSEUDO-PERIODIC MEDIA  uniformly distributed diffusion coefficient K0K0

29 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory DETERMINISTIC [CASE II] NON-PERIODIC MEDIA  A 512x512 mesh for complete resolution  4-noded bilinear quads for FEM  MsFEM-L is not attempted owing to superior performance of MsFEM-Os and VMS-Os [for deterministic studies] Coarse/ subgrid MsFEM-Os [L2,Linf] x10 5 VMS-Os [L2,Linf] x10 5 [32,8]0.77,13.20.75,12.6 [16,16]1.97,30.01.78,28.6 [8,32]4.75,33.84.78,32.9

30 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC [CASE I] RESULTS FEM MsFEM-Os VMS-Os U0 U1 U2

31 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC [CASE I] ERROR MEASURES  L-inf error was calculated on the mean value  Again, VMS is consistently better than MsFEM-Os.

32 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory STOCHASTIC [CASE I] EFFECT OF PC TERMS  We have assumed that the fine scale solution has more PC terms in its expansion  While reconstructing the fully resolved solution from the fine scale solution, we can only reconstruct up to the PC C terms. Beyond those terms, the fine scale solution is no longer a one- to-one map, hence, we see abnormalities (still equal in L-2) L2 error Linf error P F -P C

33 Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory PRESENT AND FUTURE  Are currently applying VMS to transient diffusion problems in heterogeneous media  Applying VMS for solving convection-diffusion in random media  Implementation of over-sampling method in the context of VMS  Implementation of support-space techniques with VMS hypothesis applied in sample space [spatial and stochastic VMS]  Adaptive generation and solution of subgrid problems, specifically in convection-diffusion applications


Download ppt "Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 169 Frank H. T. Rhodes Hall Cornell University Ithaca,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google