Finite Elements and Approximation

CHAPTER ONE

Continuum Boundary Value Problems and the Need for Numerical Discretization. Finite Difference Methods

1.1.INTRODUCTION

While searching for a quantitative description of physical phenomena, the engineer or the physicist establishes generally a system of ordinary or partial differential equations valid in a certain region (or domain) and imposes on this system suitable boundary and initial conditions. At this stage the mathematical model is complete, and for practical applications merely a solution for a particular set of numerical data is needed. Here, however, come the major difficulties, as only the very simplest forms of equations, within geometrically trivial boundaries, are capable of being solved exactly with available mathematical methods. Ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients are one of the few examples for which standard solution procedures are available—and even here, with a large number of dependent variables, considerable difficulties are encountered.

To overcome such difficulties and to enlist the aid of the most powerful tool developed in this century—the digital computer—it is necessary to recast the problem in a purely algebraic form, involving only the basic arithmetic operations. To achieve this, various forms of discretization of the continuum problem defined by the differential equations can be used. In such a discretization the infinite set of numbers representing the unknown function or functions is replaced by a finite number of unknown parameters, and this process, in general, requires some form of approximation.

Of the various forms of discretization which are possible, one of the simplest is the finite difference process. In this chapter we describe some of the essentials of this process to set the stage, but the remainder of this book is concerned with various trial function approximations falling under the general classification of finite element methods. The reader will find later that even the finite difference process can be included as a subclass of this more general category.

Before proceeding further we shall focus our attention on some particular problems which will serve as a basis for later examples. It is clearly impossible to deal in detail in a book of this length with a wide range of physical problems, each requiring an introduction to its background. It is our hope, however, that the few examples chosen will serve to introduce the general principles of approximation, which the readers can then apply to their own particular special cases.

1.2.SOME EXAMPLES OF CONTINUUM PROBLEMS

Consider the example of Fig. 1.1a in which a problem of heat flow in a two-dimensional domain Ω is presented. If the heat flowing in the direction of the x and y axes per unit length and in unit time is denoted by qx and qy respectively, the difference D between outflow and inflow for an element of size dx dy is given as

For conservation of heat, this quantity must be equal to the sum of the heat generated in the element in unit time, say, Q dx dy, where Q may vary with position and time, and the heat released in unit time due to the temperature change, namely, − where c is the specific heat, ρ is the density and (x, y, t) is the temperature distribution. Clearly, this requirement of equality leads to the differential relationship

which has to be satisfied throughout the problem domain Ω.

FIGURE 1.1. Examples of continuum problems. (a) Two-dimensional heat conduction. (b) One-dimensional heat conduction.

Introducing now a physical law governing the heat flow in an isotropic medium,¹ we can write, for the flow component in any direction n,

where k is a property of the medium known as the conductivity. Specifically, in the x and y directions we can then write for an isotropic material

Relationships (1.2) and (1.4) define a system of differential equations governing the problem at hand, and which now requires solution for the three dependent variables ax, qy and .

Such a solution needs the specification of initial conditions at time, say, t = t0 (e.g., the distribution of temperature may be given everywhere in Ω at this time) and of boundary conditions on the surface or boundary Γ of the problem. Typically two different kinds of boundary condition may be involved.

In the first condition, say applicable on a portion Γ of the boundary, the values of the temperature are specified as so we nave

A boundary condition of this form is frequently referred to as being a Dirichlet boundary condition.

In the second condition, applicable on the remainder Γq of the boundary, the values of the heat outflow in the direction n normal to the boundary are prescribed as . Then we can write

or, alternatively,

This type of boundary condition is often called a Neumann boundary condition.

The problem now is completely defined by Eq. (1.2), (1.4), (1.5), and (1.6), and numbers representing the distribution of , qx, and qy at all times can, in principle, be obtained by the solution of this set of equations.

This problem may be expressed in an alternative form by using Eq. (1.4) to eliminate the quantities qx and qy from Eq. (1.2), and now a higher order differential equation in a single independent variable results. Performing this elimination produces the equation

which once again requires the specification of initial and boundary conditions.

In the above we have been concerned with a problem defined in time and space domains, with the former requiring the specification of initial conditions. The independent variables here were x, y, and t. If steady-state conditions are assumed (i.e., the problem is invariant with time and so 6666 6666t = 0), the governing equation (1.2) or (1.7) simplifies. In the latter case we have

which for solution requires only the imposition of boundary conditions of the form (1.5) and (1.6). Such boundary value problems will be the subject of discussion of the major part of this book, but in Chapter 7 we shall return to time-dependent equations and consider possible methods for their solution.

While we have written here the governing equations for a two-dimensional situation, this could have easily been extended to three dimensions to deal with more general problems. On the other hand, in some problems only a one-dimensional variation occurs; in Fig. 1.1b, for instance, we consider the heat flow through a slab in which conditions do not vary with y. Then, from Eq. (1.8), we have for steady state an ordinary differential equation

and the problem domain is now simply the range 0 x Lx.

Such an ordinary differential equation can be solved analytically, but we shall use it and similar equations extensively to illustrate the application of discretization procedures. This will enable us to demonstrate the accuracy of approximate methods by comparing their results with the exact solutions.

The problem of heat flow just described is typical of many other physical situations and indeed can be identified with problems such as the following.

1.  Irrotational ideal fluid flow. If we put k = 1, Q = 0, then Eq. (1.8) reduces to a simple Laplacian form;

which is the equation governing the distribution of the potential in irrotational ideal fluid flow.

2.  Flow of fluid through porous media. Here we take Q = 0 and identify k as the medium permeability. The hydraulic head then satisfies Eq. (1.8).

3.  Small deformation of membranes under a lateral load. With k = 1 and Q defined to be the ratio of the lateral load intensity to the in-plane tension of the membrane, Eq. (1.8) is the equation governing the transverse membrane deflection .

Other applications will occur to the reader familiar with different physical and engineering problems, and from time to time we shall introduce in this book different applications of the above differential equation and indeed other systems of differential equations.

Although at such times the full exploration of the origin and derivation of such equations may not always be apparent to all readers, we hope that the procedures of mathematical discretization adopted to produce a solution will be clear in each case.

1.3.FINITE DIFFERENCES IN ONE DIMENSION

Suppose we are faced with a simple one-dimensional boundary value problem, that is, we wish to determine a function (x) which satisfies a given differential equation in the region 0 x Lx, together with appropriate boundary conditions at x = 0 and x = Lx. As we have just seen, a typical example of this type of problem would be that of calculating the temperature distribution (x) through a slab of thickness Lx, of thermal conductivity k, with the faces x = 0 and x = Lx maintained at given temperatures and , respectively, and with heat generation at a rate Q(x) per unit length in the slab. The governing differential equation for this problem is given by Eq. (1.9), which reduces to the equation

if we make the assumption that the material thermal conductivity is constant. The associated boundary conditions are of the type given in Eq. (1.5) and can be written as

To solve this problem by the finite difference method we begin by differencing the independent variable x, that is, we construct a set (or grid or mesh) of L +1 discrete, equally spaced grid points xl (l = 0, 1, 2,..., L) on the range 0 x Lx (see Fig. 1.2) with x0 = 0, xL = Lx, and xl+1 − xl = Δx.

The next step is to replace those terms in the differential equation that involve differentiation by terms involving algebraic operations only. This process, of necessity, involves an approximation and can be accomplished by making use of the finite difference approximations to function derivatives. The manner in which such approximations can be made are now discussed.

1.3.1.  The Finite Difference Approximation of Derivatives

Using Taylor’s theorem with remainder we can write, exactly,

where θ1, is some number in the range 0 θ1 1. Using the subscript l to denote an evaluation at x = xl this can be written

FIGURE 1.2. Construction of a finite difference mesh over the interval 0 x Lx.

and therefore

This leads to the so-called forward difference approximation of the first derivative of a function in which

The error E in this approximation can be seen to be given by

and as E is equal to a constant multiplied by Δx, we say that this error is O(Δx). This is known as the order of the error.

The exact magnitude of the error cannot be obtained from this expression, as the actual value of θ1 is not given by Taylor’s theorem, but it follows that

Figure 1.3 shows a graphical interpretation of the approximation that we have derived mathematically. The first derivative of (x) at x = xl is the slope of the tangent to the curve y = (x) at this point, that is, the slope of the line AB. The forward difference approximation is the slope of the Une AC, and it can be seen that the slope of this line approaches that of the line AB as the mesh spacing Δx gets smaller.

FIGURE 1.3. A graphical interpretation of some finite difference approximations to d /dx. Forward difference—slope of AC; backward difference—slope of DA; central difference—slope of DC.

In a similar manner we can use Taylor’s theorem to obtain

where 0 θ2 1. Rewriting this expression in the form

we can produce the backward difference approximation

The error E in this approximation is again O(Δx), and now

The graphical representation of the backward difference approximation can be seen in Figure 1.3; the slope of the line AB is now approximated by the slope of the line AD.

In both the forward and the backward difference approximations the error is of the same order, that is, O(Δx). However, if we replace the expansions of Eqs. (1.14) and (1.19) by

then a more accurate representation for the first derivative can be obtained by subtracting Eq. (1.23b) from Eq. (1.23a). The resulting equation

can be used to derive the central difference approximation

and the error E in this approximation satisfies

As the error here is O(Δx²), this should now be a better representation than either the forward or the backward difference approximation. This can again be seen in Fig. 1.3, where the graphical interpretation is that we are now approximating to the slope of the line AB by the slope of the line DC. Again, adding the Taylor expansions

we find that the terms involving the first and third derivatives disappear. The result is that

and so we can approximate the second derivative by

The error E in this approximation is O(Δx²) and satisfies

These approximations to first and second derivatives are sufficient for our present purposes, but approximations (of increasing complexity) to higher order derivatives can be obtained in a similar manner if so required. This point is briefly considered further in Section 1.10.

1.3.2.  Solution of a Differentia! Equation by the Finite Difference Method

If we evaluate Eq. (1.11) at a typical grid point xl, we obtain, exactly,

and using the approximation of Eq. (1.29) for the second derivative produces the equation

An equation of this form arises at each of the interior grid points xl (l = 1, 2,..., L − 1) on the finite difference mesh. Writing down these equations separately gives [changing the sign and inserting the boundary conditions of Eq. (1.12)]

If is a column vector whose transpose is ( ), tnen this set of equations may be written as a single matrix equation,

where

Thus the original problem of determining an unknown continuous function (x) has been replaced by the problem of solving a matrix equation for the discrete set of values .

The finite difference method will therefore give information about the function values at the mesh points, but it gives us no information about the function values between these points. Indeed we have only approximated to the governing equation at a discrete number of points and not throughout the region.

The solution to Eq. (1.34) can be efficiently computed by noting that the matrix K is symmetric, positive definite and tridiagonal, and then using an inversion algorithm specifically designed for such an equation system.² It must be remembered that the resulting solution only approximates to the exact solution of the problem as originally posed because of the approximation involved in replacing Eq. (1.31) by Eq. (1.32). However, the fact that the error in the approximation is O(Δx²) indicates that reducing the mesh spacing should reduce the error involved and produce a more accurate solution.

The practical use of the finite difference method will now be illustrated by applying the general theory outlined above to a particular simple example.

Example 1.1

It is required to obtain the solution of the equation d² /dx² − = 0 which satisfies the boundary conditions = 0 at x = 0 and = 1 at x = 1. A mesh spacing is chosen, as shown in Fig. 1.4, and the solution may then be found by the finite difference method.

The only unknowns are 1 and 2, the values of the solution at the points and , respectively, while the given boundary conditions imply that 0 = 0 and 3 = 1.

The equation evaluated at a general grid point xl is

which can be expressed in finite difference form, using the approximation of Eq. (1.29), as

Using this equation for l = 1 and l = 2, that is, the two interior points, and inserting the known conditions, gives

FIGURE 1.4. Finite difference mesh adopted for the solution of Examples 1.1 and 1.2.

with solution

The reader can readily obtain the analytical solution for this simple example and the above results can then be compared with the exact grid point values of 0.2889 and 0.6102, respectively.

If the calculation is repeated with , the solution of the resulting equation system gives values of 0.2890 and 0.6104 for the finite difference approximations to the value of at and , respectively. The improvement in the accuracy of the finite difference approximations with a decrease in mesh spacing is then apparent.

EXERCISES

1.1.  Solve the equation subject to the conditions = 1 at x = 0 and = 0 at x = 1, using a mesh point spacing Δx = 0.25. Compare the resulting finite difference solution with the exact solution.

1.2.  The distribution of bending moment M in a beam subjected to loading by a distributed load w(x) per unit length satisfies the equation d²M/dx² = w(x). A beam of unit length is simply supported (i.e., M = 0) at both ends and carries a load w(x) = sin πx per unit length. Calculate the distribution of the bending moment by the finite difference method using a mesh point spacing Δx = 0.25.

1.3.  The equation governing the variation in temperature T in a viscous fluid flowing between two parallel plates (y = 0 and y = 2 H) is given to be

where µ, k, and U are the viscosity, thermal conductivity, and maximum velocity of the fluid respectively. If µ = 0.1, k = 0.08, H = 3.0, and U = 3.0, calculate the temperature distribution when one plate is held at T = 0 and the other at T = 5, using the finite difference method and a mesh point spacing Δy = 0.5 H.

1.4.  A cable at tension T is held fixed at its ends x = 0 and x = 1 and rests on an elastic foundation of stiffness k. When the cable is loaded transversely with load w per unit length, the deflection of the cable osatisfies the equation Solve this equation by the finite difference method for the case k/T = 1, w/T = 1, using a mesh point spacing Δx = 0.1 and a suitable computer program. Compare your solutions with the exact answer to this problem.

1.5.  On a finite difference mesh with point spacing Δx, the first derivative is to be replaced by the approximation where a and b are constants. Show that if it is required that this approximation be exact whenever is a linear function of x, then , that is, the forward difference method. If the same requirement is applied to the approximation show that the result is the backward difference method. (Hint: First move the origin to x = xl using X = x − xl and then require equality for both = 1 and = X.)

1.6.  Prove that if the approximation is exact whenever is a quadratic function of x, then a, b, and c are such that the approximation is that of Eq. (1.29). Show that this approximation is also exact if is a cubic.

1.7.  Construct an approximation

by requiring that the approximation be exact if is a quartic function of x. What is the order of the error in this approximation?

1.4.DERIVATIVE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Frequently in real problems one (or more) of the associated boundary conditions may be expressed in terms of a derivative; for example, returning to our heat flow problem of Section 1.3, suppose that we now assume that the surface x = Lx of the slab is subjected to a condition of prescribed heat flux q across the surface (i.e., a condition of the form of Eq. (1.6) is to be applied). Using Eq. (1.6), the appropriate condition at x = Lx is now not that the temperature itself is specified at this point, but that the gradient of the temperature is specified, namely,

Then if we repeat the work of the previous section-and write down the finite difference equation at each interior point, we obtain

which, since L is now unknown, is a set of L − 1 equations in the L unknowns . The missing equation has to be provided by the boundary condition of Eq. (1.37), which can be written as

If the derivative is replaced by the backward difference approximation of Eq. (1.21), then this condition becomes

which together with Eq. (1.38) produces a complete set of L equations in the unknowns .

Example 1.2

Return again to the equation considered in Example 1.1, but subjected now to the boundary conditions = 0 at x = 0 and d /dx = 1 at x = 1. If the finite difference mesh shown in Fig. 1.4 is used, the unknowns are 1, 2, and 3, while the boundary conditions give .

The finite difference approximation of the governing equation at x1 and at x2 becomes

and using a backward difference representation of the derivative boundary condition at x3 produces

The solution of this set of equations can be found to be

and the corresponding exact solutions in this case are 0.2200, 0.4648, and 0.7616.

There is an inconsistency in the above analysis in that we have represented the differential equation to within an error which is O(Δx²), whereas our backward difference approximation to the derivative means that