Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

On the choice of finite element for applications in geodynamics

View through CrossRef
Abstract. Geodynamical simulations over the past decades have widely been built on quadrilateral and hexahedral finite elements. For the discretisation of the key Stokes equation describing slow, viscous flow, most codes use either the unstable Q1 × P0 element, a stabilised version of the equal-order Q1 × Q1 element, or more recently the stable Taylor-Hood element with continuous (Q2 × Q1) or discontinuous (Q2 × P−1) pressure. However, it is not clear which of these choices is actually the best at accurately simulating typical geodynamic situations. Herein, we are providing for the first time a systematic comparison of all of these elements. We use a series of benchmarks that illuminate different aspects of the features we consider typical of mantle convection and geodynamical simulations. We will show in particular that the stabilised Q1 × Q1 element has great difficulty producing accurate solutions for buoyancy-driven flows – the dominant forcing for mantle convection flow – and that the Q1 × P0 element is too unstable and inaccurate in practice. As a consequence, we believe that the Q2 × Q1 and Q2 × P−1 elements provide the most robust and reliable choice for geodynamical simulations, despite the greater complexity in their implementation and the substantially higher computational cost when solving linear systems.
Title: On the choice of finite element for applications in geodynamics
Description:
Abstract.
Geodynamical simulations over the past decades have widely been built on quadrilateral and hexahedral finite elements.
For the discretisation of the key Stokes equation describing slow, viscous flow, most codes use either the unstable Q1 × P0 element, a stabilised version of the equal-order Q1 × Q1 element, or more recently the stable Taylor-Hood element with continuous (Q2 × Q1) or discontinuous (Q2 × P−1) pressure.
However, it is not clear which of these choices is actually the best at accurately simulating typical geodynamic situations.
Herein, we are providing for the first time a systematic comparison of all of these elements.
We use a series of benchmarks that illuminate different aspects of the features we consider typical of mantle convection and geodynamical simulations.
We will show in particular that the stabilised Q1 × Q1 element has great difficulty producing accurate solutions for buoyancy-driven flows – the dominant forcing for mantle convection flow – and that the Q1 × P0 element is too unstable and inaccurate in practice.
As a consequence, we believe that the Q2 × Q1 and Q2 × P−1 elements provide the most robust and reliable choice for geodynamical simulations, despite the greater complexity in their implementation and the substantially higher computational cost when solving linear systems.

Related Results

Shape optimization for beam structural design
Shape optimization for beam structural design
"Optimization is concerned with achieving the best outcome of a given objective while satisfying certain restrictions. The central purpose of structural analysis is to predict the ...
Report of meeting U.S. geodynamics committee
Report of meeting U.S. geodynamics committee
Following publication of the report U.S. Program for the Geodynamics Project: Scope and Obectives by the U.S. Geodynamics Committee (USGC), ten ad hoc reporters were designated to ...
Pseudorange multipath at Zomba geodynamics Continuously Operating Reference Station (CORS) in Malawi
Pseudorange multipath at Zomba geodynamics Continuously Operating Reference Station (CORS) in Malawi
Multipath effects are mostly regarded as a nuisance in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver measurements and it is of utmost relevance to expose the magnitude this er...
Numerical solution of Stefan problem with variable space grid method based on mixed finite element/finite difference approach
Numerical solution of Stefan problem with variable space grid method based on mixed finite element/finite difference approach
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to improve the accuracy and stability of the existing solutions to 1D Stefan problem with time-dependent Dirichlet boundary conditions. The accu...
When clitics collide
When clitics collide
Summary The paper deals with a few aspects of the morphosyntax of clitics in Piedmontese (Western Romance) and their historical development. In Piedmontese an element =l= (orth...
SCF Equations for T/Y and K Square-to-Round Tubular Joint
SCF Equations for T/Y and K Square-to-Round Tubular Joint
Summary A parametric stress analysis of T/Y and K square-to-round tubular joints subjected to axial loads and in-plane and out-of-plane bending moments has been p...
Development of the Finite Segment Method for Modeling Railroad Track Structures
Development of the Finite Segment Method for Modeling Railroad Track Structures
In the finite segment method, the dynamics of a deformable body is described using a set of rigid bodies that are connected by elastic force elements. This approach can be used, as...
A Review on Biomechanics and Development of Finite Element Models of Human Head Neck System
A Review on Biomechanics and Development of Finite Element Models of Human Head Neck System
Abstract: The biomechanics of human head neck system could be better understood by creating finite element models of the same that accurately represents most of the components of h...

Back to Top