Explicit empirical formula evaluating original intensity factors of singular boundary method for potential and Helmholtz problems

Abstract This short communication proposes two new explicit empirical formulas to determine the original intensity factors on Neumann and Dirichlet boundary in the singular boundary method (SBM) solution of 2D and 3D potential and Helmholtz problems. Without numerical integration and subtracting and adding-back technique, the original intensity factors can be obtained directly by implementing the proposed explicit empirical formulas. The numerical investigations show that the SBM with these new explicit empirical formulas can provide the accurate solutions of several benchmark examples in comparison with the analytical, Boundary element method (BEM) and Regularized meshless method (RMM) solutions. In most cases, the present SBM with empirical formulas yields the similar numerical accuracy as the BEM and the SBM in which the original intensity factors are evaluated by the other time-consuming approaches. It is worthy of noting that the empirical formula costs far less CPU and storage requirements at the same number of boundary nodes and performs more stably than the inverse interpolation technique in the SBM.

[1]  A. Cheng,et al.  Singular boundary method for 2D dynamic poroelastic problems , 2016 .

[2]  Wen Chen,et al.  A method of fundamental solutions without fictitious boundary , 2010 .

[3]  Lin Li,et al.  Application of the New Fast Multi-pole Boundary Element Method for Calculation of Electric Field , 2014 .

[4]  Zhuojia Fu,et al.  Singular boundary method for water wave problems , 2015 .

[5]  Wen Chen,et al.  Numerical investigation on the obliquely incident water wave passing through the submerged breakwater by singular boundary method , 2016, Comput. Math. Appl..

[6]  Michael A. Golberg,et al.  The method of fundamental solutions and quasi‐Monte‐Carlo method for diffusion equations , 1998 .

[7]  Non-Singular Method of Fundamental Solutions based on Laplace decomposition for 2D Stokes flow problems , 2014 .

[8]  Zhuo-Jia Fu,et al.  Singular boundary method using time-dependent fundamental solution for scalar wave equations , 2016 .

[9]  Chia-Ming Fan,et al.  Numerical Solutions of Direct and Inverse Stokes Problems by the Method of Fundamental Solutions and the Laplacian Decomposition , 2015 .

[10]  Hang Ma,et al.  Nondestructive determination of welding residual stresses by boundary element method , 1998 .

[11]  Xiaolin Li,et al.  Meshless singular boundary methods for biharmonic problems , 2015 .

[12]  A. Cheng,et al.  Heritage and early history of the boundary element method , 2005 .

[13]  Božidar Šarler,et al.  Solution of potential flow problems by the modified method of fundamental solutions: Formulations with the single layer and the double layer fundamental solutions , 2009 .

[14]  Analysis of Two-Dimensional Thin Structures (From Micro- to Nano-Scales) Using the Singular Boundary Method , 2015 .

[15]  Hokwon A. Cho,et al.  Some comments on the ill-conditioning of the method of fundamental solutions , 2006 .

[16]  C. Fan,et al.  The Method of Fundamental Solutions for Solving Convection-Diffusion Equations with Variable Coefficients , 2009 .

[17]  A. N. Williams,et al.  Wave Forces on an Elliptic Cylinder , 1985 .

[18]  Chein-Shan Liu,et al.  A new regularized boundary integral equation for three-dimensional potential gradient field , 2016, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[19]  Ying-Te Lee,et al.  Analysis of mutiple-shepers radiation and scattering problems by using a null-field integral equation approach , 2010 .

[20]  C. Y. Dong,et al.  Shape optimizations of inhomogeneities of two dimensional (2D) and three dimensional (3D) steady state heat conduction problems by the boundary element method , 2015 .