I'm reading an article from this website:


My question is about several formulations in that paper:

The paper is about a wave equation and the use of a Galerkin method to discretize in space.

(1) Page 4 enter image description here

why does the author use the fraction subscript? A convention?

(2) Page 5 enter image description here

Why $(\hat{q_h}v^-)_{j+\frac{1}{2}}$? Since this term is derived from the boundery of $I_j$, why not $q_h^-$ directly?

(3) Most important, the energy estimate, page 6

enter image description here

see (2.8) which is derived from (2.4). Why did the author simply differentiate over q and u, instead of using the chain rule?

Any help would be appreciated.

  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure I understand your third question, when you ask about using the chain rule. Does the following help? My interpretation of the setup is that in 2.4 the function $q_h$ is intended to be a function of time and space, but the test function $w$ is a spatial function only, and the desire is that $2.4$ holds for all test functions, over a time interval. Differentiating $2.4$ with respect to time therefore will only give time derivatives to $q$ and $v$. $\endgroup$ – Jason Knapp Jul 24 '14 at 13:10

For (1):

When using staggered grids it is common to denote the cell center with integer index and the cell faces shifted by 1/2. I think that this is a common notation.

For (2):

If you have $u_{tt}=q_x$ and apply the projection you get $\int u_{tt} v dx-\int q_x v dx=0$. Now apply partial integration to $\int_{I_j} q_xv dx$ yielding $\int_{I_j} q_x v dx = - \int_{I_j}qv_x dx + [qv]_{\partial I_j}$ where $\partial I_j$ is the boundary of the interval, i.e. $j-1/2$ and $j+1/2$. The fact, that $[qv]_{\partial I_j}$ is written as $\hat qv^+-\hat qv^-$ means exactly this.

For (3):

I agree with Jason Knapp. As you can see by the $dx$ of the integral, you project your residual onto the spatial domain $V_k$ which has no time dependency. Thus you can first take the derivative w.r.t time and set make a concrete choice of $w=q_h$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.