Finite element method for shallow water equations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving shallow water equations using the finite element method (FEM), specifically addressing the treatment of nonlinear terms in the Galerkin equation. The nonlinear term in question is represented as u∇v, where u and v are velocity components expressed in terms of their finite element basis functions. The user seeks clarification on whether it is possible to avoid a double summation when handling the nonlinear term in the Galerkin formulation. The conversation highlights the integration of basis functions and their gradients in the context of FEM.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of finite element method (FEM) principles
  • Familiarity with Galerkin methods in numerical analysis
  • Knowledge of shallow water equations and their physical significance
  • Proficiency in manipulating vector calculus, particularly gradients
NEXT STEPS
  • Research techniques for handling nonlinear terms in finite element formulations
  • Explore advanced Galerkin methods for fluid dynamics applications
  • Study the implementation of shallow water equations in numerical software
  • Learn about basis function selection and their impact on FEM accuracy
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, engineers, and students in computational fluid dynamics, particularly those focusing on numerical methods for solving shallow water equations using finite element analysis.

alvesker
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I am trying to solve the shallow water equations using finite element method. Can anyone explain me how to treat nonlinear term in the Galerkin equation?

so for example in the equation for the velocity we will have the term u\nabla v
where u and v are the velocity components. For the u and v we have their finite element representations like

u = \sum_{i_1,N}u_iB_i,\ \ \ v=\sum_{i=1,N}v_iB_i

hence \nabla v=\sum_{i=1,N}v_i\nabla B_i

hence after getting the Galerkin equation (mutiplying by test function and integrating) we will have

\int u\nabla vB_kdx=\int \sum _{i=1,N} u_iB_i\sum _{i=1,N} v_i\nabla B_i B_kdx=\sum_{i,j=1,N}u_iv_j\int B_i\nabla B_jB_k dx

is there any not to treat the nonliear term explicitly - by not having a double sum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
see above
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
924
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K