A Roadmap to Well Posed and Stable Problems in Computational Physics

All numerical calculations will fail to provide a reliable answer unless the continuous problem under consideration is well posed. Well-posedness depends in most cases only on the choice of boundary conditions. In this paper we will highlight this fact, and exemplify by discussing well-posedness of a prototype problem: the time-dependent compressible Navier–Stokes equations. We do not deal with discontinuous problems, smooth solutions with smooth and compatible data are considered. In particular, we will discuss how many boundary conditions are required, where to impose them and which form they should have in order to obtain a well posed problem. Once the boundary conditions are known, one issue remains; they can be imposed weakly or strongly. It is shown that the weak and strong boundary procedures produce similar continuous energy estimates. We conclude by relating the well-posedness results to energy-stability of a numerical approximation on summation-by-parts form. It is shown that the results obtained for weak boundary conditions in the well-posedness analysis lead directly to corresponding stability results for the discrete problem, if schemes on summation-by-parts form and weak boundary conditions are used. The analysis in this paper is general and can without difficulty be extended to any coupled system of partial differential equations posed as an initial boundary value problem coupled with a numerical method on summation-by parts form with weak boundary conditions. Our ambition in this paper is to give a general roadmap for how to construct a well posed continuous problem and a stable numerical approximation, not to give exact answers to specific problems.

[1]  H. Kreiss.  Initial boundary value problems for hyperbolic systems , 1970 .

[2]  Matteo Parsani,et al.  Entropy stable wall boundary conditions for the three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes equations , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[3]  D. Givoli.  High-order local non-reflecting boundary conditions: a review☆ , 2004 .

[4]  B. Gustafsson.  High Order Difference Methods for Time Dependent PDE , 2008 .

[5]  H. T. Huynh,et al.  A Flux Reconstruction Approach to High-Order Schemes Including Discontinuous Galerkin Methods , 2007 .

[6]  Charles R. Johnson,et al.  Topics in Matrix Analysis , 1991 .

[7]  Steven H. Frankel,et al.  Entropy Stable Spectral Collocation Schemes for the Navier-Stokes Equations: Discontinuous Interfaces , 2014, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

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

[9]  Eitan Tadmor,et al.  ENTROPY STABLE APPROXIMATIONS OF NAVIER-STOKES EQUATIONS WITH NO ARTIFICIAL NUMERICAL VISCOSITY , 2006 .

[10]  Š.,et al.  A STABLE PENALTY METHOD FOR THE COMPRESSIBLE NAVIER-STOKES EQUATIONS : I , 2013 .

[11]  Magnus Svärd,et al.  A stable high-order finite difference scheme for the compressible Navier-Stokes equations, far-field boundary conditions , 2007, J. Comput. Phys..

[12]  Jeremy E. Kozdon,et al.  Simulation of Dynamic Earthquake Ruptures in Complex Geometries Using High-Order Finite Difference Methods , 2013, J. Sci. Comput..

[13]  S. Tsynkov.  Numerical solution of problems on unbounded domains. a review , 1998 .

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

[15]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Energy decay of vortices in viscous fluids: an applied mathematics view , 2012, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[16]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Boundary conditions for a divergence free velocity-pressure formulation of the Navier-Stokes equations , 2007, J. Comput. Phys..

[17]  David Gottlieb,et al.  Spectral Methods on Arbitrary Grids , 1995 .

[18]  Gilbert Strang,et al.  Accurate partial difference methods , 1964 .

[19]  Douglas N. Arnold,et al.  Unified Analysis of Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for Elliptic Problems , 2001, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[20]  Magnus Svärd,et al.  Review of summation-by-parts schemes for initial-boundary-value problems , 2013, J. Comput. Phys..

[21]  David Gottlieb,et al.  Optimal time splitting for two- and three-dimensional navier-stokes equations with mixed derivatives , 1981 .

[22]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Finite volume methods, unstructured meshes and strict stability for hyperbolic problems , 2003 .

[23]  J. Monaghan.  On the problem of penetration in particle methods , 1989 .

[24]  Gregor Gassner,et al.  A Skew-Symmetric Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Discretization and Its Relation to SBP-SAT Finite Difference Methods , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[25]  H. Kreiss,et al.  Initial-Boundary Value Problems and the Navier-Stokes Equations , 2004 .

[26]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Energy Stable Flux Reconstruction Schemes for Advection–Diffusion Problems on Tetrahedra , 2013, Journal of Scientific Computing.

[27]  Magnus Svärd,et al.  Well-Posed Boundary Conditions for the Navier-Stokes Equations , 2005, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[28]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Variance reduction through robust design of boundary conditions for stochastic hyperbolic systems of equations , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[29]  John C. Strikwerda,et al.  Initial boundary value problems for incompletely parabolic systems , 1976 .

[30]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Weak and strong wall boundary procedures and convergence to steady-state of the Navier-Stokes equations , 2012, J. Comput. Phys..

[31]  Jan S. Hesthaven,et al.  A Stable Penalty Method for the Compressible Navier-Stokes Equations: I. Open Boundary Conditions , 1996, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..