xfem using 1d stefan problem
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Simulation of 1-d Stefan Problem using XFEM
V. S. S. Srinivas
![Page 2: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline Stefan melting problem
Physical description Analytical solution
Conventional numerical modeling
Associated issues
Review of Xfem
Implementation
Results
Unresolved issues
Challenges in Xfem-2d
Discussion and future directions
![Page 3: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Stefan problem
T=T0 0°C
Initial Temperature = 0°C
h(t)
( )r
ᄊ ᄊ- = < < <
ᄊ ᄊ
2
20,0 ,0
T k Tx h t t
t c x( ) ( )00, , , 0T t T T l t= =
,@h T
L k x ht x
r ᄊ ᄊ= - =
ᄊ ᄊ
( )0, 0 0initialT h= =
Governing equations Initial and boundary conditions
![Page 4: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Analytical solution
( ) 2k
h t tc
mr
=
( ) 2 2
0
0
2
, z z
xkt
c
T x t T e dz e dzm m
r
- -=
2 20
0 2z T c
e e dzL
mmm - =
Solve the transcendental equation, get m
Transcendental equation:
Temperature profile:
Interface position:
![Page 5: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Conventional method
Always the interface has to coincide with a node
Necessitates re-meshing
T=T0
T=T0
T=T0
t=0
t=t1
t=t2
0<t1<t2
T=0
![Page 6: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
XFEM
Enrichment to elements whose support is intersected
When interface moves across elements
new nodes get enriched while the old ones shed
enrichment
No re-meshing required
Quite useful when re-meshing is costly and the interface has to be tracked explicitly
T=T0
T=T0
T=T0
t=0
t=t1
t=t2
0<t1<t2
ᅣ ᅣ
ᅣ ᅣ
ᅣ ᅣ
![Page 7: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Enriched shape function( )1 1
e
xN x
l= - ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )3 1 0N x N x xf f= -
( ) bx x xf = -Level set function in 1d:
Interface position: xb,
Element length: le=1
Xb=0.5
Xb=0.3
![Page 8: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Contd..
( )2e
xN x
l= ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )4 2 eN x N x x lf f= -
Xb=0.5
Xb=0.3
![Page 9: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Implementation
Considered 1D as opposed to a 2D scenario
Reduced the complexities associated with level sets
Performed analytical integration in computing the element matrices using Mathematica
Initial values of the enriched degrees of freedom are computed by applying the interface conditions
The element nodes are enriched when its support is intersected by the interface and vice versa
![Page 10: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Initial values determination-A case study
At t=0, the interface is located in the first element
Its nodes are enriched
Initial values?
T=T0
t=t1ᅣ ᅣ
T=0
Interface conditions:
1. T=Tm
2. Discontinuity in the gradient of temperature
T5 T6
T1
T2
T4T3
511 12 1
621 22 2
Ta a b
Ta a b
₩₩ ₩=
│ ││
Unique solution
No solution
Many solutions
Consider 2D case…
![Page 11: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Contd..
4 unknowns 6 conditions This is unlike 1D case where there are 2 unknowns and 2
conditions
ᅣ
ᅣ
ᅣ ᅣ
![Page 12: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Important features of XFEM
Enriched dofs are determined automatically
Don’t need explicit attention as in determining initial values
Matrices that have to be inverted remain symmetric
ᅣ
ᅣ
ᅣ
ᅣ ᅣ
ᅣ
ᅣ
ᅣ
Positions of enriched dofs changing
Number of enriched dofs is also changing
ᅣ
![Page 13: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
A peep into the matrices
( ) ( )( ) ( )1 1 11
q
n n n nT cT cT d T k T d Tq dtd r d d+ + +
W W G
- W + W = - GD
1 11 1n n nqt t
+ +₩ + = +D D│
*M K T M T f
( )1 1 1Tn n nc dr+ + +
W
= WM N N ( )* 1 Tn n nc dr+
W
= WM N N
( )1 1 1Tn n nk d+ + +
W
= WK N N ( )1 1 1
q
Tn n nqf q d+ + +
G
= - GN
Governing equation after applying weighted residuals
Discretized equation:
UnsymmetricSymmetric
![Page 14: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Validation: Numerical against Analytical
Validation of XFEM
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Time [s]
Inte
rfac
e p
osi
tio
n [
m]
Analytical
Numerical-XFEM
![Page 15: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Convergence check
Convergence check
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
Time [s]
Inte
rface p
os
itio
n [
m]
Nelem:11
Nelem: 9
Nelem: 6
Nelem: 4
Nelem: 3
Nelem: 2
![Page 16: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
T vs x @ t= 0-16000s
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
x [m]
T [
C]
T versus x at different times
![Page 17: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Issues-1D
Problems in determining the initial values of enriched dof for certain positions of the interface
Nodes are a set of examples May be endemic to 1D
During the interface propagation, if it falls on a node; in one instance it caused the matrix to become singular
![Page 18: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Challenges XFEM-2D
Level set schemes for embedding the interface in an implicit function
Requires stabilization schemes
May cause rank deficient matrices
![Page 19: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Pros and Cons
Don’t need re-meshing
Interfaces can be tracked explicitly
May cause rank deficient matrices
![Page 20: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Discussion
• What is our objective?
• Will this idea serve to be useful?
• What are the various possibilities in modeling our problem.
• Will this method score over others?
![Page 21: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Future directions
Check if the singularity issues related to determining initial values persist in 2D
If yes, ways to eliminate them Extend this model to 2D
Explore the possibility of using Abaqus with XFEM capability
![Page 22: xfem using 1D stefan problem](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042509/55a3ea301a28abde378b459c/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Thank you