TY - JOUR
T1 - A Comparison of Fourier Spectral Iterative Perturbation Method and Finite Element Method in Solving Phase-Field Equilibrium Equations
AU - Song, Pengcheng
AU - Yang, Tiannan
AU - Ji, Yanzhou
AU - Wang, Zhuo
AU - Yang, Zhigang
AU - Chen, Longqing
AU - Chen, Lei
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Global-Science Press.
PY - 2017/5/1
Y1 - 2017/5/1
N2 - This paper systematically compares the numerical implementation and computational cost between the Fourier spectral iterative perturbation method (FSIPM) and the finite element method (FEM) in solving partial differential equilibrium equations with inhomogeneous material coefficients and eigen-fields (e.g., stress-free strain and spontaneous electric polarization) involved in phase-field models. Four benchmark numerical examples, including inhomogeneous elastic, electrostatic, and steady-state heat conduction problems demonstrate that (1) the FSIPM rigorously requires uniform hexahedral (3D) and quadrilateral (2D) mesh and periodic boundary conditions for numerical implementation while the FEM permits arbitrary mesh and boundary conditions; (2) the FSIPM solutions are comparable to their FEM counterparts, and both of them agree with the analytic solutions, (3) the FSIPM is much faster in solving equilibrium equations than the FEM to achieve the accurate solutions, thus exhibiting a greater potential for large-scale 3D computations.
AB - This paper systematically compares the numerical implementation and computational cost between the Fourier spectral iterative perturbation method (FSIPM) and the finite element method (FEM) in solving partial differential equilibrium equations with inhomogeneous material coefficients and eigen-fields (e.g., stress-free strain and spontaneous electric polarization) involved in phase-field models. Four benchmark numerical examples, including inhomogeneous elastic, electrostatic, and steady-state heat conduction problems demonstrate that (1) the FSIPM rigorously requires uniform hexahedral (3D) and quadrilateral (2D) mesh and periodic boundary conditions for numerical implementation while the FEM permits arbitrary mesh and boundary conditions; (2) the FSIPM solutions are comparable to their FEM counterparts, and both of them agree with the analytic solutions, (3) the FSIPM is much faster in solving equilibrium equations than the FEM to achieve the accurate solutions, thus exhibiting a greater potential for large-scale 3D computations.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016219247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016219247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4208/cicp.OA-2016-0114
DO - 10.4208/cicp.OA-2016-0114
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85016219247
SN - 1815-2406
VL - 21
SP - 1325
EP - 1349
JO - Communications in Computational Physics
JF - Communications in Computational Physics
IS - 5
ER -