# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

January  2019, 24(1): 387-402. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2018109

## Two-grid finite element method for the stabilization of mixed Stokes-Darcy model

 1 College of Science, Donghua University, Shanghai 201620, China 2 Department of Mathematics, East China Normal University, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Practice, Shanghai 200241, China 3 College of Science, Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China 4 Department of Mathematics, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77024, USA 5 Department of Mathematics, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202, USA

* Corresponding author: Feng Shi (shi.feng@hit.edu.cn)

Received  April 2017 Revised  August 2017 Published  March 2018

Fund Project: The first author is supported by NSFC (Grant Nos. 11501097 and 11471071). The second author is partially supported by NSFC (Grant Nos. 11201369 and 11771337). The third author is partially subsidized by Basic Research Program of Shenzhen (Grant No. JCYJ20150831112754988).

A two-grid discretization for the stabilized finite element method for mixed Stokes-Darcy problem is proposed and analyzed. The lowest equal-order velocity-pressure pairs are used due to their simplicity and attractive computational properties, such as much simpler data structures and less computer memory for meshes and algebraic system, easier interpolations, and convenient usages of many existing preconditioners and fast solvers in simulations, which make these pairs a much popular choice in engineering practice; see e.g., [4,27]. The decoupling methods are adopted for solving coupled systems based on the significant features that decoupling methods can allow us to solve the submodel problems independently by using most appropriate numerical techniques and preconditioners, and also to reduce substantial coding tasks. The main idea in this paper is that, on the coarse grid, we solve a stabilized finite element scheme for coupled Stokes-Darcy problem; then on the fine grid, we apply the coarse grid approximation to the interface conditions, and solve two independent subproblems: one is the stabilized finite element method for Stokes subproblem, and another one is the Darcy subproblem. Optimal error estimates are derived, and several numerical experiments are carried out to demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of the two-grid stabilized finite element algorithm.

Citation: Jiaping Yu, Haibiao Zheng, Feng Shi, Ren Zhao. Two-grid finite element method for the stabilization of mixed Stokes-Darcy model. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (1) : 387-402. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2018109
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
The pressure line by TGM (Left), StbTGM (Middle) and TGM-$(P_1, P_1, P_1)$ (Right)
Streamlines for the numerical velocity by TGM (Left), StbTGM (Middle) and TGM-$(P_1, P_1, P_1)$ (Right)
The velocity streamlines of the backward facing step flow with two interface conditions: Case 1 (top), Case 2 (bottom)
The convergence performance and CPU time by SFEM
 h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac14$ 3.666e-1 - 2.051e-1 - 9.850e-1 - 0.101 $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.850e-2 0.948 5.103e-2 1.004 9.534e-2 1.684 3.547 $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.476e-2 0.996 1.280e-2 0.998 3.858e-2 0.653 214.951
 h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac14$ 3.666e-1 - 2.051e-1 - 9.850e-1 - 0.101 $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.850e-2 0.948 5.103e-2 1.004 9.534e-2 1.684 3.547 $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.476e-2 0.996 1.280e-2 0.998 3.858e-2 0.653 214.951
The convergence performance and CPU time by TGM
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac14$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.577e-2 - 5.109e-2 - 1.741e-1 - 0.181 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.405e-2 0.997 1.275e-2 1.001 3.799e-2 1.098 2.127 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 6.014e-3 1.000 3.187e-3 1.000 9.134e-3 1.028 39.827
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac14$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.577e-2 - 5.109e-2 - 1.741e-1 - 0.181 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.405e-2 0.997 1.275e-2 1.001 3.799e-2 1.098 2.127 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 6.014e-3 1.000 3.187e-3 1.000 9.134e-3 1.028 39.827
The convergence performance and CPU time by StbTGM
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.577e-2 - 5.494e-2 - 1.540e-1 - 0.117 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.404e-2 0.997 1.375e-2 1.000 3.682e-2 1.032 1.351 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 6.012e-3 1.000 3.437e-3 1.000 9.267e-3 0.995 26.805
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.577e-2 - 5.494e-2 - 1.540e-1 - 0.117 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.404e-2 0.997 1.375e-2 1.000 3.682e-2 1.032 1.351 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 6.012e-3 1.000 3.437e-3 1.000 9.267e-3 0.995 26.805
The convergence performance by StbTGM with fixed $H = 1/8$
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.470e-2 5.489e-2 5.040e-2 $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.404e-2 0.989 1.375e-2 0.999 3.682e-2 0.226 $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 7.033e-3 0.887 3.525e-3 0.982 3.704e-2 -0.004
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.470e-2 5.489e-2 5.040e-2 $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.404e-2 0.989 1.375e-2 0.999 3.682e-2 0.226 $\frac18$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 7.033e-3 0.887 3.525e-3 0.982 3.704e-2 -0.004
The convergence performance and CPU time by TGM-$(P_1, P_1, P_1)$
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.553e-2 - 5.539e-2 - 4.594e+7 - 0.117 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.403e-2 0.996 1.386e-2 0.999 2.904e+6 - 1.351 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ null - null - null - -
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate CPU $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 9.553e-2 - 5.539e-2 - 4.594e+7 - 0.117 $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 2.403e-2 0.996 1.386e-2 0.999 2.904e+6 - 1.351 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ null - null - null - -
The approximation errors by StbTGM for $k = 0.1$
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.181e-2 - 4.057e-2 - 2.15254e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.297e-2 0.999 1.006e-2 1.006 5.853e-3 0.939 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.243e-3 1.000 2.509e-3 1.001 1.536e-3 0.965
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.181e-2 - 4.057e-2 - 2.15254e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.297e-2 0.999 1.006e-2 1.006 5.853e-3 0.939 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.243e-3 1.000 2.509e-3 1.001 1.536e-3 0.965
The approximation errors by StbTGM for $k = 0.01$
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.397e-2 - 7.288e-2 - 3.03543e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.350e-2 1.000 1.610e-2 1.089 8.070e-3 0.956 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.372e-3 1.001 3.785e-3 1.044 2.081e-3 0.978
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.397e-2 - 7.288e-2 - 3.03543e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.350e-2 1.000 1.610e-2 1.089 8.070e-3 0.956 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.372e-3 1.001 3.785e-3 1.044 2.081e-3 0.978
The approximation errors by StbTGM for $k = 0.001$
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.490e-2 - 4.467e-1 - 2.793e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.375e-2 0.999 6.834e-2 1.3541 6.980e-3 1.000 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.423e-3 1.003 1.229e-2 1.238 1.755e-3 0.996
 H h $\|\varphi-\varphi^h\|_{1, \Omega_p}$ Rate $\|u-u^h\|_{1, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\|p-p^h\|_{0, \Omega_f}$ Rate $\frac{1}{4}$ $\frac{1}{16}$ 5.490e-2 - 4.467e-1 - 2.793e-2 - $\frac{1}{8}$ $\frac{1}{64}$ 1.375e-2 0.999 6.834e-2 1.3541 6.980e-3 1.000 $\frac{1}{16}$ $\frac{1}{256}$ 3.423e-3 1.003 1.229e-2 1.238 1.755e-3 0.996
 [1] Gang Bao, Mingming Zhang, Bin Hu, Peijun Li. An adaptive finite element DtN method for the three-dimensional acoustic scattering problem. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020351 [2] Yue Feng, Yujie Liu, Ruishu Wang, Shangyou Zhang. A conforming discontinuous Galerkin finite element method on rectangular partitions. Electronic Research Archive, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/era.2020120 [3] Zhilei Liang, Jiangyu Shuai. Existence of strong solution for the Cauchy problem of fully compressible Navier-Stokes equations in two dimensions. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020348 [4] Zuliang Lu, Fei Huang, Xiankui Wu, Lin Li, Shang Liu. Convergence and quasi-optimality of $L^2-$norms based an adaptive finite element method for nonlinear optimal control problems. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28 (4) : 1459-1486. doi: 10.3934/era.2020077 [5] Li-Bin Liu, Ying Liang, Jian Zhang, Xiaobing Bao. A robust adaptive grid method for singularly perturbed Burger-Huxley equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28 (4) : 1439-1457. doi: 10.3934/era.2020076 [6] Helmut Abels, Andreas Marquardt. On a linearized Mullins-Sekerka/Stokes system for two-phase flows. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020467 [7] Peizhao Yu, Guoshan Zhang, Yi Zhang. Decoupling of cubic polynomial matrix systems. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (1) : 13-26. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020012 [8] Abdollah Borhanifar, Maria Alessandra Ragusa, Sohrab Valizadeh. High-order numerical method for two-dimensional Riesz space fractional advection-dispersion equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020355 [9] Marion Darbas, Jérémy Heleine, Stephanie Lohrengel. Numerical resolution by the quasi-reversibility method of a data completion problem for Maxwell's equations. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2020, 14 (6) : 1107-1133. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2020056 [10] Wolfgang Riedl, Robert Baier, Matthias Gerdts. Optimization-based subdivision algorithm for reachable sets. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2021, 8 (1) : 99-130. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2021005 [11] Xuhui Peng, Rangrang Zhang. Approximations of stochastic 3D tamed Navier-Stokes equations. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2020, 19 (12) : 5337-5365. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020241 [12] Nicolas Rougerie. On two properties of the Fisher information. Kinetic & Related Models, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/krm.2020049 [13] Mohammed Abdulrazaq Kahya, Suhaib Abduljabbar Altamir, Zakariya Yahya Algamal. Improving whale optimization algorithm for feature selection with a time-varying transfer function. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (1) : 87-98. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020017 [14] Cheng Peng, Zhaohui Tang, Weihua Gui, Qing Chen, Jing He. A bidirectional weighted boundary distance algorithm for time series similarity computation based on optimized sliding window size. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (1) : 205-220. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019107 [15] Xuefei He, Kun Wang, Liwei Xu. Efficient finite difference methods for the nonlinear Helmholtz equation in Kerr medium. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28 (4) : 1503-1528. doi: 10.3934/era.2020079 [16] Anton A. Kutsenko. Isomorphism between one-Dimensional and multidimensional finite difference operators. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2021, 20 (1) : 359-368. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020270 [17] Mehdi Bastani, Davod Khojasteh Salkuyeh. On the GSOR iteration method for image restoration. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (1) : 27-43. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020013 [18] Min Chen, Olivier Goubet, Shenghao Li. Mathematical analysis of bump to bucket problem. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2020, 19 (12) : 5567-5580. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020251 [19] Qingfang Wang, Hua Yang. Solutions of nonlocal problem with critical exponent. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2020, 19 (12) : 5591-5608. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020253 [20] Leanne Dong. Random attractors for stochastic Navier-Stokes equation on a 2D rotating sphere with stable Lévy noise. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020352

2019 Impact Factor: 1.27