Numerical analysis of the Burgers' equation in the presence of uncertainty

The Burgers' equation with uncertain initial and boundary conditions is investigated using a polynomial chaos (PC) expansion approach where the solution is represented as a truncated series of stochastic, orthogonal polynomials. The analysis of well-posedness for the system resulting after Galerkin projection is presented and follows the pattern of the corresponding deterministic Burgers equation. The numerical discretization is based on spatial derivative operators satisfying the summation by parts property and weak boundary conditions to ensure stability. Similarly to the deterministic case, the explicit time step for the hyperbolic stochastic problem is proportional to the inverse of the largest eigenvalue of the system matrix. The time step naturally decreases compared to the deterministic case since the spectral radius of the continuous problem grows with the number of polynomial chaos coefficients. An estimate of the eigenvalues is provided. A characteristic analysis of the truncated PC system is presented and gives a qualitative description of the development of the system over time for different initial and boundary conditions. It is shown that a precise statistical characterization of the input uncertainty is required and partial information, e.g. the expected values and the variance, are not sufficient to obtain a solution. An analytical solution is derived and the coefficients of the infinite PC expansion are shown to be smooth, while the corresponding coefficients of the truncated expansion are discontinuous.

[1]  D. Xiu,et al.  Modeling uncertainty in flow simulations via generalized polynomial chaos , 2003 .

[2]  Chris L. Pettit,et al.  investigated aeroelastic behaviors arising from variability in three input variables , the initial pitch angle and two stiffness coefficients , 2006 .

[3]  George Em Karniadakis,et al.  Supersensitivity due to uncertain boundary conditions , 2004 .

[4]  W. T. Martin,et al.  The Orthogonal Development of Non-Linear Functionals in Series of Fourier-Hermite Functionals , 1947 .

[5]  Mike Christie,et al.  Uncertainty quantification for porous media flows , 2006, J. Comput. Phys..

[6]  Rene F. Swarttouw,et al.  Orthogonal polynomials , 2020, NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions.

[7]  M. Hussaini,et al.  APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE THEORY TO QUANTIFY UNCERTAINTY IN FORECAST OF HURRICANE PATH , 2005 .

[8]  H. Najm,et al.  Uncertainty quantification in reacting-flow simulations through non-intrusive spectral projection , 2003 .

[9]  G. Karniadakis,et al.  Long-Term Behavior of Polynomial Chaos in Stochastic Flow Simulations , 2006 .

[10]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Boundary and Interface Conditions for High-Order Finite-Difference Methods Applied to the Euler and Navier-Stokes Equations , 1999 .

[11]  R. Ghanem,et al.  Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach , 1990 .

[12]  Jeroen A. S. Witteveen,et al.  Modeling physical uncertainties in dynamic stall induced fluid-structure interaction of turbine blades using arbitrary polynomial chaos , 2007 .

[13]  Dongbin Xiu,et al.  The Wiener-Askey Polynomial Chaos for Stochastic Differential Equations , 2002, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[14]  B. Strand.  Summation by parts for finite difference approximations for d/dx , 1994 .

[15]  Thomas Y. Hou,et al.  Wiener Chaos expansions and numerical solutions of randomly forced equations of fluid mechanics , 2006, J. Comput. Phys..

[16]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Conservative Finite Difference Formulations, Variable Coefficients, Energy Estimates and Artificial Dissipation , 2006, J. Sci. Comput..

[17]  D. Gottlieb,et al.  Time-stable boundary conditions for finite-difference schemes solving hyperbolic systems: methodology and application to high-order compact schemes , 1994 .

[18]  R. D. Richtmyer,et al.  Difference methods for initial-value problems , 1959 .

[19]  Magnus Svärd,et al.  Stable and Accurate Artificial Dissipation , 2004, J. Sci. Comput..

[20]  D. Gottlieb,et al.  A Stable and Conservative Interface Treatment of Arbitrary Spatial Accuracy , 1999 .

[21]  R. LeVeque.  Numerical methods for conservation laws , 1990 .

[22]  Jan S. Hesthaven,et al.  Computational modeling of uncertainty in time-domain electromagnetics , 2005, Workshop on Computational Electromagnetics in Time-Domain, 2005. CEM-TD 2005..

[23]  N. Cutland,et al.  On homogeneous chaos , 1991, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[24]  William L. Oberkampf,et al.  Guide for the verification and validation of computational fluid dynamics simulations , 1998 .

[25]  D. Funaro.  Polynomial Approximation of Differential Equations , 1992 .

[26]  D. Gottlieb,et al.  Spectral methods for hyperbolic problems , 2001 .

[27]  Ming Zhao,et al.  Uncertainty quantification for chaotic computational fluid dynamics , 2006, J. Comput. Phys..

[28]  Jan Nordström,et al.  High-order finite difference methods, multidimensional linear problems, and curvilinear coordinates , 2001 .

[29]  Robert H. Halstead,et al.  Matrix Computations , 2011, Encyclopedia of Parallel Computing.

[30]  A. Peirce.  Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , 2010 .

[31]  H. Kreiss,et al.  Time-Dependent Problems and Difference Methods , 1996 .

[32]  R. D. Richtmyer,et al.  Difference methods for initial-value problems , 1959 .

[33]  Jan S. Hesthaven,et al.  Uncertainty analysis for the steady-state flows in a dual throat nozzle , 2005 .