A comparison of Picard and Newton iteration in the numerical solution of multidimensional variably saturated flow problems

Picard iteration is a widely used procedure for solving the nonlinear equation governing flow in variably saturated porous media. The method is simple to code and computationally cheap, but has been known to fail or converge slowly. The Newton method is more complex and expensive (on a per-iteration basis) than Picard, and as such has not received very much attention. Its robustness and higher rate of convergence, however, make it an attractive alternative to the Picard method, particularly for strongly nonlinear problems. In this paper the Picard and Newton schemes are implemented and compared in one-, two-, and three-dimensional finite element simulations involving both steady state and transient flow. The eight test cases presented highlight different aspects of the performance of the two iterative methods and the different factors that can affect their convergence and efficiency, including problem size, spatial and temporal discretization, initial solution estimates, convergence error norm, mass lumping, time weighting, conductivity and moisture content characteristics, boundary conditions, seepage faces, and the extent of fully saturated zones in the soil. Previous strategies for enhancing the performance of the Picard and Newton schemes are revisited, and new ones are suggested. The strategies include chord slope approximations for the derivatives of the characteristic equations, relaxing convergence requirements along seepage faces, dynamic time step control, nonlinear relaxation, and a mixed Picard-Newton approach. The tests show that the Picard or relaxed Picard schemes are often adequate for solving Richards' equation, but that in cases where these fail to converge or converge slowly, the Newton method should be used. The mixed Picard-Newton approach can effectively overcome the Newton scheme's sensitivity to initial solution estimates, while comparatively poor performance is reported for the various chord slope approximations. Finally, given the reliability and efficiency of current conjugate gradient-like methods for solving linear nonsymmetric systems, the only real drawback of using Newton rather than Picard iteration is the algebraic complexity and computational cost of assembling the derivative terms of the Jacobian matrix, and it is suggested that both methods can be effectively implemented and used in numerical models of Richards' equation.

[1]  R. L. Cooley Some new procedures for numerical solution of variably saturated flow problems , 1983 .

[2]  Logan K. Kuiper A Comparison of Iterative Methods as Applied to the Solution of the Nonlinear Three-Dimensional Groundwater Flow Equation , 1987 .

[3]  D. S. Ward,et al.  Finite Element Matrix and Mass Balance Computational Schemes for Transport in Variably Saturated Porous Media , 1985 .

[4]  D. R. Nielsen,et al.  On describing and predicting the hydraulic properties of unsaturated soils , 1985 .

[5]  P. Huyakorn,et al.  A three‐dimensional finite‐element model for simulating water flow in variably saturated porous media , 1986 .

[6]  R. Ababou,et al.  Three-dimensional flow in random porous media , 1988 .

[7]  Emil O. Frind,et al.  Three‐dimensional modeling of groundwater flow systems , 1978 .

[8]  Giuseppe Gambolati,et al.  3-D finite element transport models by upwind preconditioned conjugate gradients , 1989 .

[9]  Willem F. Brutsaert,et al.  A Functional Iteration Technique for Solving the Richards Equation Applied to Two‐Dimensional Infiltration Problems , 1971 .

[10]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  SATURATED-UNSATURATED SEEPAGE BY FINITE ELEMENTS , 1973 .

[11]  J. J. Moré,et al.  Quasi-Newton Methods, Motivation and Theory , 1974 .

[12]  G. Strang,et al.  The solution of nonlinear finite element equations , 1979 .

[13]  M. Celia,et al.  A General Mass-Conservative Numerical Solution for the Unsaturated Flow Equation , 1990 .

[14]  P. Huyakorn,et al.  Techniques for Making Finite Elements Competitve in Modeling Flow in Variably Saturated Porous Media , 1984 .

[15]  R. Ababou,et al.  Numerical simulation of three-dimensional saturated flow in randomly heterogeneous porous media , 1989 .

[16]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  A detailed model for simulation of catchment scale subsurface hydrologic processes , 1993 .

[17]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  NUMERICAL EVALUATION OF ITERATIVE AND NONITERATIVE METHODS FOR THE SOLUTION OF THE NONLINEAR RICHARDS EQUATION , 1991 .

[18]  Roland W. Freund,et al.  A Transpose-Free Quasi-Minimal Residual Algorithm for Non-Hermitian Linear Systems , 1993, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[19]  D. Kershaw The incomplete Cholesky—conjugate gradient method for the iterative solution of systems of linear equations , 1978 .

[20]  R. G. Hills,et al.  Modeling one‐dimensional infiltration into very dry soils: 1. Model development and evaluation , 1989 .

[21]  J. Philip,et al.  Theory of Infiltration , 1969 .

[22]  Charles R. Faust,et al.  Transport of Immiscible Fluids Within and Below the Unsaturated Zone: A Numerical Model , 1985 .

[23]  A. Pullan The quasilinear approximation for unsaturated porous media flow. , 1990 .

[24]  The Conjugate Gradients in Subsurface Flow and Land Subsidence Modelling , 1984 .

[25]  G. Pinder,et al.  Computational Methods in Subsurface Flow , 1983 .

[26]  P. J. Ross,et al.  Efficient numerical methods for infiltration using Richards' equation , 1990 .

[27]  O. Axelsson Conjugate gradient type methods for unsymmetric and inconsistent systems of linear equations , 1980 .

[28]  Henk A. van der Vorst,et al.  Bi-CGSTAB: A Fast and Smoothly Converging Variant of Bi-CG for the Solution of Nonsymmetric Linear Systems , 1992, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..