FEM: periodic boundary conditions (1D)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on constructing the mass matrix for a 1D finite element system with periodic boundary conditions. The user is uncertain about the values for the mass matrix elements corresponding to the 10th node, particularly M_{10,10} and M_{10,1}, which differ significantly from other elements. It is clarified that while x_11 and x_1 represent the same physical point due to periodicity, they should be treated distinctly in the matrix formulation. The consensus is that the values at the edges should align with the periodic nature of the system, and the 11th node can be manually included during plotting without affecting the matrix dimensions. Overall, maintaining the periodic boundary conditions is essential for accurate representation in the finite element analysis.
Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0
I am trying to set up the mass matrix for a 1D system which I want to solve using finite elements. So the mass matrix is defined as

<br /> M = \int{NN^T}dL,<br />
where N is the finite element linear basis functions. I use hat functions.

Say I have 10 elements, corresponding to 11 nodes running from -5 to 5 so the spacing is 1. Node 1 is equal to node 11 since I want to employ periodic boundary conditions.

My issue is that I am not sure how to construct the mass matrix for the 10th node. As shown here, the elements for the 10th node will be (I use periodic boundary conditions, so x_{N+1}=x_1)

<br /> M_{10,10} = \frac{x_{1}-x_{10}}{3} = -10/3\\<br /> M_{10,1} = \frac{x_{1}-x_{10}}{6} = -10/6<br />
All other elements have positive values given by 1/3 and 1/6, respectively.

Are my values for M_{10,10} and M_{10,1} correct? I find it odd that their values are so much different than the values in the "bulk".
 
Technology news on Phys.org
This is 1D, so is it a line?
Is x_11 actually x_1 or is it x_1 + P where P is your period in X?
Thus f(x_11) = f(x_1) but x_11 is not actually x_1.
If this is the case, use x_11 for x_11 and in the matrix assign it the position of x_1 since it will be multiplied by that node.
 
Thanks, that is also what I thought. But then my matrix has dimensions 10x10, but my field will have 11 values since x_11 and x_1 are not the same. But that won't work when I multiply them together (?)

Am I missing something?
 
x_11 and x_1 are not the same in reality, but in the matrix they have the same role.
The main thing is that you are keeping with the periodic nature in your x, if all other entries are 1/3 and 1/6, then so should the ones at the edge.
You aren't actually putting the 11th value in, but when you plot it, you can manually put the 11th point in.
 
Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'
I've tried to intuit public key encryption but never quite managed. But this seems to wrap it up in a bow. This seems to be a very elegant way of transmitting a message publicly that only the sender and receiver can decipher. Is this how PKE works? No, it cant be. In the above case, the requester knows the target's "secret" key - because they have his ID, and therefore knows his birthdate.
Back
Top