Reference : Weakening the tight coupling between geometry and simulation in isogeometric analysis |

Scientific congresses, symposiums and conference proceedings : Unpublished conference | |||

Engineering, computing & technology : Multidisciplinary, general & others | |||

Computational Sciences | |||

http://hdl.handle.net/10993/25533 | |||

Weakening the tight coupling between geometry and simulation in isogeometric analysis | |

English | |

Bordas, Stéphane [University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Engineering Research Unit >] | |

Tomar, Satyendra [University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Engineering Research Unit >] | |

Atroshchenko, Elena [University of Chile- UC > Department of Mechanical Engineering] | |

Xu, Gang [Hangzhou Dianzi University- HDU] | |

5-Jun-2016 | |

No | |

International | |

ECCOMAS Congress 2016 | |

05-06-2016 to 10-06-2016 | |

European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering | |

Crete Island | |

Greece | |

[en] isogeometric ; simulation, geometry ; NURBS | |

[en] In the standard paradigm of isogeometric analysis, the geometry and the simulation spaces are tightly
integrated, i.e. the same non-uniform rational B-splines (NURBS) space, which is used for the geometry representation of the domain, is employed for the numerical solution of the problem over the domain. However, there are situations where this tight integration is a bane rather than a boon. Such situations arise where, e.g., (1) the geometry of the domain is simple enough to be represented by low order NURBS, whereas the unknown (exact) solution of the problem is sufficiently regular, and thus, the numerical solution can be obtained with improved accuracy by using NURBS of order higher than that required for the geometry, (2) the constraint of using the same space for the geometry and the numerical solution is particularly undesirable, such as in the shape and topology optimization, and (3) the solution of the problem has low regularity but for the curved boundary of the domain one can employ higher order NURBS. Therefore, we propose to weaken this constraint. An extensive study of patch tests on various combinations of polynomial degree, geometry type, and various cases of varying degrees and control variables between the geometry and the numerical solution will be discussed. It will be shown, with concrete reasoning, that why patch test fails in certain cases, and that those cases should be avoided in practice. Thereafter, selective numerical examples will be presented to address some of the above-mentioned situations, and it will be shown that weakening the tight coupling between geometry and simulation offers more flexibility in choosing the numerical solution spaces, and thus, improved accuracy of the numerical solution. Powered by | |

Researchers ; Professionals ; Students ; General public ; Others | |

http://hdl.handle.net/10993/25533 | |

https://www.eccomas2016.org/ |

File(s) associated to this reference | ||||||||||||||

| ||||||||||||||

All documents in ORBi^{lu} are protected by a user license.