CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

Nodal DG versus Modal DG methods?

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 28, 2008, 14:41
Default Nodal DG versus Modal DG methods?
  #1
Jinwon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am conducting compressible flow simulations based on the modal discontinuous Galerkin method. In doing this, I sometime found that there is another version of DG method, the nodal DG one. Is there anyone knowing the difference between two versions and advantages/disadvantages of each method? I wonder if there is a big difference. For compressible flow simulations, which one is better?
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2008, 00:31
Default Re: Nodal DG versus Modal DG methods?
  #2
jack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
can you send your modal DG result picture to me? dirac_euler@hotmail.com
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2008, 00:35
Default Re: Nodal DG versus Modal DG methods?
  #3
jack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
nodal DG uses lagrange interploration so it is difficult to deal with boundary node, it belong to H refinement,while modal DG is something like spectral method,it can get a p refinement.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2008, 05:07
Default Re: Nodal DG versus Modal DG methods?
  #4
Jed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
With DG, each element is independent so either method can be used with h- and p-refinement. They are pretty much equivalent at low order, but their computational complexity is potentially different at high order. This applies to both the DG and continuous Galerkin.

If the problem is linear, then a clever choice of basis can make the modal stiffness matrix sparse. This is not so for nonlinear problems or for a nodal basis. However, a nodal basis is well suited to Q1 finite element preconditioning. That is, discretize the Jacobian on the nodes of the high order basis using Q1 finite elements. This approximation to the real Jacobian is very sparse and spectrally equivalent. In a (Jacobian-Free) Newton-Krylov iteration, you need only assemble this preconditioner. Thus constructing the preconditioner is a cheap as for Q1 finite elements, but the high-order method converges in a constant number of iterations.

The key choice is whether you want a hierarchical basis (for modal multigrid preconditioning) or a sparse preconditioning matrix to which you can apply standard preconditioners. If you are not exploiting these properties, then modal vs. nodal doesn't really matter.

Spectral equivalence has now been proven: @article{kim2007pbp, title={{Piecewise bilinear preconditioning of high-order finite element methods}}, author={Kim, S.D.}, journal={Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis}, volume={26}, pages={228--242}, year={2007} }
  Reply With Quote

Old   January 25, 2014, 14:17
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
cfdnewbie
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 557
Rep Power: 20
cfdnewbie is on a distinguished road
Just to add a bit to the discussion: the fastest existing DG is a spectral, nodal DG on hexas (see e.g. book by Kopriva: implementing spectral methods). It uses interpolation as integration points, and thus resembles collocation spectral methods closely in terms of speed.
cfdnewbie is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 19, 2015, 09:16
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0
kielman is on a distinguished road
If you are still interested in this question you should read this thread :
http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/que...-disadvantages
kielman is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any questions about Runge-Kutta methods Runge_Kutta Main CFD Forum 33 September 9, 2019 17:32
Any questions about implicit Runge-Kutta methods? Runge_Kutta Main CFD Forum 3 March 4, 2005 18:36
about Modal and Nodal in spectral element method Qu Kun Main CFD Forum 0 November 2, 2004 04:53
comments on FDM, FEM, FVM, SM, SEM, DSEM, BEM kenn Main CFD Forum 2 July 18, 2004 19:28
I just wonder why "SIMPLE" Junseok Kim Main CFD Forum 21 May 20, 2001 09:47


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:19.