Calculating mixed partial derivatives on a 3D mesh

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of mixed partial derivatives for a scalar function defined on the vertices of a 3D mesh, specifically in the context of implementing a PDE model to simulate crystal growth on the mesh surface. The conversation includes technical challenges related to numerical methods and finite element analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their approach to calculating mixed partial derivatives, which involves computing the gradient of a scalar function and then interpolating this gradient to the vertices of the mesh, but notes inaccuracies in the results.
  • Another participant suggests that sophisticated methods from finite element analysis may address the problem.
  • A different participant proposes comparing numerical results with analytically derived results to identify errors in the method.
  • Some participants inquire about the specific problem being solved, indicating that there may be existing finite element analysis methods available for the task.
  • The original poster clarifies that they are simulating crystal growth on a 3D mesh surface, treating it as a texture and defining a scalar function that evolves over time according to a PDE.
  • One participant asks whether the mesh is rectangular or triangular, indicating a need for clarity on the mesh type used in the calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the methods for calculating mixed partial derivatives, with no consensus on the best approach or the accuracy of the original method described. Multiple competing views on the use of finite element analysis and the specifics of the problem remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the original method, including the dependence on the type of mesh and the interpolation technique used, but does not resolve these issues.

KareemErgawy
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am working on implementing a PDE model that simulates a certain physical phenomenon on the surface of a 3D mesh.

The model involves calculating mixed partial derivatives of a scalar function defined on the vertices of the mesh.

What I tried so far (which is not giving good results), is this:

1. First, I calculate the gradient of the scalar function over the mesh. This gives me the first derivative in the x, y, and z directions (the gradient vector field over the mesh).
2. Since the gradient field is defined per face (as opposed to per vertex), I interpolate the gradient field to the vertices by performing a weighted averaging over the triangles that share a vertex. I am using the areas of the triangles as the weights.
3. After this interpolation, the gradient (first order derivative is now define "interpolated" over the vertices). I use this interpolated vector field as input to the gradient operator again and get the gradient of each component in the vector.

I know that this is incorrect (or at least inaccurate) since the scalar function originally defined over the mesh goes out the range of values it should be restricted to if the model was implemented correctly.

So, how can I calculate an accurate descritized approximation of mixed partial derivatives over a 3D mesh?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sophisticated methods for dealing with this sort of problem can be found in the theory of finite element analysis .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KareemErgawy
Perhaps you can compare your numerical result with analytically derived results at each stage and find out where your method is going wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KareemErgawy
Nidum said:
Sophisticated methods for dealing with this sort of problem can be found in the theory of finite element analysis .
Thanks for the reply. Can you refer me to some resources that might be helpful in that regard?
 
Can you describe what problem you are actually trying to solve - it is quite possible that there is a ready made FE analysis method available .

If no ready made method is available I will give you references to the underlying principles of FE and to programs which can be tailored to suit your needs .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KareemErgawy
Nidum said:
Can you describe what problem you are actually trying to solve - it is quite possible that there is a ready made FE analysis method available .

If no ready made method is available I will give you references to the underlying principles of FE and to programs which can be tailored to suit your needs .
Yup, what I am trying to implement specifically is the model proposed in this paper: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=156977. If you don't have access to it, I can write down the equations here. But at least the abstract should give a good idea about the phenomenon it is simulating.

One thing to note is that my goal is to simulate crystal growth but on the surface on a 3D mesh instead of a 2D grid. Please note that I am treating the surface of the 3D mesh as a texture (not explicitly parametrized; however). So I have a scalar function defined on the vertices of a 3D mesh, say theta. This function ranges from 0 to 1 over the vertices of the mesh. Over time, there is a PDE that simulates the change of values (phases) over the mesh surface.

Hope that clarifies thing a little bit more and thanks for help.
 
Is this a rectangular mesh, or are you using a triangular mesh?

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K