A Comparison of HDG Methods for Stokes Flow

In this paper, we compare hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin (HDG) methods for numerically solving the velocity-pressure-gradient, velocity-pressure-stress, and velocity-pressure-vorticity formulations of Stokes flow. Although they are defined by using different formulations of the Stokes equations, the methods share several common features. First, they use polynomials of degree k for all the components of the approximate solution. Second, they have the same globally coupled variables, namely, the approximate trace of the velocity on the faces and the mean of the pressure on the elements. Third, they give rise to a matrix system of the same size, sparsity structure and similar condition number. As a result, they have the same computational complexity and storage requirement. And fourth, they can provide, by means of an element-by element postprocessing, a new approximation of the velocity which, unlike the original velocity, is divergence-free and H(div)-conforming. We present numerical results showing that each of the approximations provided by these three methods converge with the optimal order of k+1 in L2 for any k≥0. We also display experiments indicating that the postprocessed velocity is a better approximation than the original approximate velocity. It converges with an additional order than the original velocity for the gradient-based HDG, and with the same order for the vorticity-based HDG methods. For the stress-based HDG methods, it seems to converge with an additional order for even polynomial degree approximations. Finally, the numerical results indicate that the method based on the velocity-pressure-gradient formulation provides the best approximations for similar computational complexity.

[1]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  A new elasticity element made for enforcing weak stress symmetry , 2010, Math. Comput..

[2]  Antonio Huerta,et al.  Discontinuous Galerkin methods for the Stokes equations using divergence‐free approximations , 2008 .

[3]  R. Verfürth A posteriori error estimators for the Stokes equations , 1989 .

[4]  Francisco-Javier Sayas,et al.  Analysis of HDG methods for Stokes flow , 2011, Math. Comput..

[5]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  The Derivation of Hybridizable Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for Stokes Flow , 2009, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[6]  Michel Fortin,et al.  Mixed and Hybrid Finite Element Methods , 2011, Springer Series in Computational Mathematics.

[7]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cma , 2022 .

[8]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  Incompressible Finite Elements via Hybridization. Part I: The Stokes System in Two Space Dimensions , 2005, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[9]  Guido Kanschat,et al.  Local Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for the Stokes System , 2002, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[10]  Junping Wang,et al.  New Finite Element Methods in Computational Fluid Dynamics by H(div) Elements , 2007, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[11]  Guido Kanschat,et al.  A Note on Discontinuous Galerkin Divergence-free Solutions of the Navier–Stokes Equations , 2007, J. Sci. Comput..

[12]  J. Nédélec A new family of mixed finite elements in ℝ3 , 1986 .

[13]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  Hybridized globally divergence-free LDG methods. Part I: The Stokes problem , 2005, Math. Comput..

[14]  Bernardo Cockburn,et al.  A hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin method for linear elasticity , 2009 .

[15]  Ohannes A. Karakashian,et al.  Piecewise solenoidal vector fields and the Stokes problem , 1990 .

[16]  L. Kovasznay Laminar flow behind a two-dimensional grid , 1948 .

[17]  Guido Kanschat,et al.  A locally conservative LDG method for the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations , 2004, Math. Comput..