A moving mesh fictitious domain approach for shape optimization problems

Raino A.E. Mäkinen; Tuomo Rossi; Jari Toivanen

ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis (2010)

  • Volume: 34, Issue: 1, page 31-45
  • ISSN: 0764-583X

Abstract

top
A new numerical method based on fictitious domain methods for shape optimization problems governed by the Poisson equation is proposed. The basic idea is to combine the boundary variation technique, in which the mesh is moving during the optimization, and efficient fictitious domain preconditioning in the solution of the (adjoint) state equations. Neumann boundary value problems are solved using an algebraic fictitious domain method. A mixed formulation based on boundary Lagrange multipliers is used for Dirichlet boundary problems and the resulting saddle-point problems are preconditioned with block diagonal fictitious domain preconditioners. Under given assumptions on the meshes, these preconditioners are shown to be optimal with respect to the condition number. The numerical experiments demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed approaches.

How to cite

top

Mäkinen, Raino A.E., Rossi, Tuomo, and Toivanen, Jari. "A moving mesh fictitious domain approach for shape optimization problems." ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 34.1 (2010): 31-45. <http://eudml.org/doc/197532>.

@article{Mäkinen2010,
abstract = { A new numerical method based on fictitious domain methods for shape optimization problems governed by the Poisson equation is proposed. The basic idea is to combine the boundary variation technique, in which the mesh is moving during the optimization, and efficient fictitious domain preconditioning in the solution of the (adjoint) state equations. Neumann boundary value problems are solved using an algebraic fictitious domain method. A mixed formulation based on boundary Lagrange multipliers is used for Dirichlet boundary problems and the resulting saddle-point problems are preconditioned with block diagonal fictitious domain preconditioners. Under given assumptions on the meshes, these preconditioners are shown to be optimal with respect to the condition number. The numerical experiments demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed approaches. },
author = {Mäkinen, Raino A.E., Rossi, Tuomo, Toivanen, Jari},
journal = {ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis},
keywords = {Shape optimization; fictitious domain method; preconditioning; boundary variation technique; sensitivity analysis.; fictitious domain methods; shape optimization; Poisson equation; boundary variation technique; Lagrange multipliers; saddle-point problems; numerical experiments},
language = {eng},
month = {3},
number = {1},
pages = {31-45},
publisher = {EDP Sciences},
title = {A moving mesh fictitious domain approach for shape optimization problems},
url = {http://eudml.org/doc/197532},
volume = {34},
year = {2010},
}

TY - JOUR
AU - Mäkinen, Raino A.E.
AU - Rossi, Tuomo
AU - Toivanen, Jari
TI - A moving mesh fictitious domain approach for shape optimization problems
JO - ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis
DA - 2010/3//
PB - EDP Sciences
VL - 34
IS - 1
SP - 31
EP - 45
AB - A new numerical method based on fictitious domain methods for shape optimization problems governed by the Poisson equation is proposed. The basic idea is to combine the boundary variation technique, in which the mesh is moving during the optimization, and efficient fictitious domain preconditioning in the solution of the (adjoint) state equations. Neumann boundary value problems are solved using an algebraic fictitious domain method. A mixed formulation based on boundary Lagrange multipliers is used for Dirichlet boundary problems and the resulting saddle-point problems are preconditioned with block diagonal fictitious domain preconditioners. Under given assumptions on the meshes, these preconditioners are shown to be optimal with respect to the condition number. The numerical experiments demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed approaches.
LA - eng
KW - Shape optimization; fictitious domain method; preconditioning; boundary variation technique; sensitivity analysis.; fictitious domain methods; shape optimization; Poisson equation; boundary variation technique; Lagrange multipliers; saddle-point problems; numerical experiments
UR - http://eudml.org/doc/197532
ER -

References

top
  1. G.P. Astrakhantsev, Method of fictitious domains for a second-order elliptic equation with natural boundary conditions. USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys.18 (1978) 114-121.  
  2. C. Atamian, G.V. Dinh, R. Glowinski, J. He and J. Périaux, On some imbedding methods applied to fluid dynamics and electro-magnetics. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.91 (1991) 1271-1299.  
  3. I. Babuska, The finite element method with Lagrangian multipliers. Numer. Math.20 (1973) 179-192.  
  4. A. Bespalov, Yu.A. Kuznetsov, O. Pironneau and M.-G. Vallet, Fictitious domain with separable preconditioners versus unstructured adapted meshes. Impact Comput. Sci. Eng.4 (1992) 217-249.  
  5. C. Börgers, A triangulation algorithm for fast elliptic solvers based on domain imbedding. SIAM J. Numer. Anal.27 (1990) 1187-1196.  
  6. C. Börgers and O.B. Widlund, On finite element domain imbedding methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal.27 (1990) 963-978.  
  7. V. Braibant and C. Fleury, Shape optimal design using B-splines. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.44 (1984) 247-267.  
  8. J.H. Bramble, The Lagrangian multiplier method for Dirichlet's problem. Math. Comp.37 (1981) 1-11.  
  9. J.H. Bramble, J.E. Pasciak and A.H. Schatz, The construction of preconditioners for elliptic problems by substructuring, I. Math. Comp.47 (1986) 103-134.  
  10. R.A. Brockman, Geometric sensitivity analysis with isoparametric finite elements. Comm. Appl. Numer. Math.3 (1987) 495-499.  
  11. T.F. Chan, Analysis of preconditioners for domain decomposition. SIAM J. Numer. Anal.24 (1987) 382-390.  
  12. J. Danková and J. Haslinger, Fictitious domain approach used in shape optimization: Neumann boudary condition, in Control of Partial Differential Equations and Applications (Laredo, 1994), Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., Dekker, New York 174 (1996) 43-49.  
  13. J. Danková and J. Haslinger, Numerical realization of a fictitious domain approach used in shape optimization. I. Distributed controls. Appl. Math.41 (1996) 123-147.  
  14. P. Duysinx, W.H. Zhang and C. Fleury, Sensitivity analysis with unstructured free mesh generators in 2-D and 3-D shape optimization, in Structural Optimization 93, Vol. 2, Rio de Janeiro (1993) 205-212.  
  15. P.E. Gill, W. Murray and M.H. Wright, Practical Optimization. Academic Press, New York (1981).  
  16. R. Glowinski, T. Hesla, D.D. Joseph, T.-W. Pan and J. Périaux, Distributed Lagrange multiplier methods for particulate flows, in Computational Science for the 21st Century, M.-O. Bristeau, G. Etgen, W. Fitzgibbon, J.L. Lions, J. Périaux and M.F. Wheeler Eds., Wiley, Chichester (1997) 270-279.  
  17. R. Glowinski and Yu.A. Kuznetsov, On the solution of the Dirichlet problem for linear elliptic operators by a distributed Lagrande multiplier method. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math.327 (1998) 693-698.  
  18. R. Glowinski, T.-W. Pan, A.J. Kearsley and J. Périaux, Numerical simulation and optimal shape for viscous flow by a fictitious domain method. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Fluids20 (1995) 695-711.  
  19. R. Glowinski, T.-W. Pan and J. Périaux, A fictitious domain method for Dirichlet problem and applications. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.111 (1994) 283-303.  
  20. A. Greenbaum, Iterative Methods for Solving Linear Systems. Frontiers in Applied Mathematics, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, USA 17 (1997).  
  21. J. Haslinger, Imbedding/control approach for solving optimal shape design problems. East-West J. Numer. Math.1 (1993) 111-119.  
  22. J. Haslinger, Comparison of different fictitious domain approaches used in shape optimization. Tech. Rep. 15, Laboratory of Scientific Computing, University of Jyväskylä (1996).  
  23. J. Haslinger, K.H. Hoffmann and M. Kocvara, Control/fictitious domain method for solving optimal shape design problems. RAIRO Modél. Math. Anal. Numér.27 (1993) 157-182.  
  24. J. Haslinger and D. Jedelský, Genetic algorithms and fictitious domain based approaches in shape optimization. Structural Optimization12 (1996) 257-264.  
  25. J. Haslinger and A. Klarbring, Fictitious domain/mixed finite element approach for a class of optimal shape design problems. RAIRO Modél. Math. Anal. Numér.29 (1995) 435-450.  
  26. J. Haslinger and P. Neittaanmäki, Finite Element Approximation for Optimal Shape, Material and Topology Design, 2nd ed., Wiley, Chichester (1996).  
  27. J. He, Méthodes de domaines fictifs en méchanique des fluides applications aux écoulements potentiels instationnaires autour d'obstacles mobiles. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris VI (1994).  
  28. E. Heikkola, Y. Kuznetsov, T. Rossi and P. Tarvainen, Efficient preconditioners based on fictitious domains for elliptic FE-problems with Lagrange multipliers, in ENUMATH 97 - Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Numerical Mathematics and Advanced Applications, H.G. Bock, G. Kanschat, R. Rannacher, F. Brezzi, R. Glowinski, Yu.A. Kuznetsov and J. Périaux Eds., World Scientific Publishing Co., Inc., River Edge, NJ (1998) 646-661.  
  29. K. Kunisch and G. Peichl, Shape optimization for mixed boundary value problems based on an embedding method. Dynam. Contin. Discrete Impuls. Systems4 (1998) 439-478.  
  30. Yu.A. Kuznetsov, Efficient iterative solvers for elliptic finite element problems on nonmatching grids. Russian J. Numer. Anal. Math. Modelling10 (1995) 187-211.  
  31. Yu.A. Kuznetsov, Iterative analysis of finite element problems with Lagrange multipliers, in Computational Science for the 21st Century, M.-O. Bristeau, G. Etgen, W. Fitzgibbon, J.L. Lions, J. Périaux and M.F. Wheeler Eds., Wiley, Chichester (1997) 170-178.  
  32. Yu.A. Kuznetsov and M.F. Wheeler, Optimal order substructuring preconditioners for mixed finite element methods on nonmaching grids. East-West J. Numer. Math.3 (1995) 127-143.  
  33. R. Mäkinen, Finite-element design sensitivity analysis for non-linear potential problems. Comm. Appl. Numer. Math.6 (1990) 343-350.  
  34. G.I. Marchuk, Yu.A. Kuznetsov and A.M. Matsokin, Fictitious domain and domain decomposition methods. Soviet J. Numer. Anal. Math. Modelling1 (1986) 3-35.  
  35. NAG, The NAG Fortran Library Manual: Mark 18. NAG Ltd, Oxford (1997).  
  36. C.C. Paige and M.A. Saunders, Solution of sparse indefinite systems of linear equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal.12 (1975) 617-629.  
  37. O. Pironneau, Optimal Shape Design for Elliptic Systems. Springer-Verlag, New York (1984).  
  38. W. Proskurowski and P.S. Vassilevski, Preconditioning capacitance matrix problems in domain imbedding. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.15 (1994) 77-88.  
  39. T. Rossi, Fictitious Domain Methods with Separable Preconditioners. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics, University of Jyväskylä (1995).  
  40. T. Rossi and J. Toivanen, A parallel fast direct solver for block tridiagonal systems with separable matrices of arbitrary dimension. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.20 (1999) 1778-1793.  
  41. J. Sokolowski and J.-P. Zolesio, Introduction to Shape Optimization. Shape Sensitivity Analysis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1992).  
  42. P.N. Swarztrauber, The methods of cyclic reduction and Fourier analysis and the FACR algorithm for the discrete solution of Poisson's equation on a rectangle. SIAM Rev.19 (1977) 490-501.  
  43. J. Toivanen, Fictitious Domain Method Applied to Shape Optimization. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics, University of Jyväskylä (1997).  
  44. L. Tomas, Optimisation de Forme et Domaines Fictifs: Analyse de Nouvelles Formulations et Aspects Algorithmiques. Ph.D. thesis, École Centrale de Lyon (1997).  

NotesEmbed ?

top

You must be logged in to post comments.

To embed these notes on your page include the following JavaScript code on your page where you want the notes to appear.

Only the controls for the widget will be shown in your chosen language. Notes will be shown in their authored language.

Tells the widget how many notes to show per page. You can cycle through additional notes using the next and previous controls.

    
                

                
Note: Best practice suggests putting the JavaScript code just before the closing </body> tag.