search

barbagroup / inexact-gmres

Paper: inexact GMRES with fast multipole method and low-p relaxation
9 stars 4 forks source link

Need reference for the analytical integration used for Laplace #9

Closed labarba closed 9 years ago

labarba commented 9 years ago

We don't want to include the long mathematical descriptions of the analytical and semi-analytical integrals, giving instead the briefest of statements about what method was used and a reference. For Stokes, I have the reference to Fata2011, but there is no reference mentioned in the thesis for the analytical integrals used for Laplace. Which reference should we cite here?

labarba commented 9 years ago

I found this reference in Christopher's thesis … from his description, it looks like the same method used here. Will a reference to this suffice? "Improving the robustness of a surface integral formulation for wideband impendance extraction of 3D structures" http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=603216

slayton58 commented 9 years ago

I believe this is the paper I used (I know Chris used this one as well, I’m very surprised it isn’t in either of our theses): http://perso.ensta-paristech.fr/~mbonnet/nintcheu_08.pdf http://perso.ensta-paristech.fr/~mbonnet/nintcheu_08.pdf

On Jun 3, 2015, at 7:57 AM, Lorena A. Barba notifications@github.com wrote:

I found this reference in Christopher's thesis … from his description, it looks like the same method used here. Will a reference to this suffice? "Improving the robustness of a surface integral formulation for wideband impendance extraction of 3D structures" http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=603216 http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=603216 — Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/barbagroup/inexact-gmres/issues/9#issuecomment-108338542.

labarba commented 9 years ago

That's not the method you describe in the thesis for the Laplace equation. For the Stokes equation, it's clear that you used Fata's formulas for elastic surface potentials, taking Poisson ratio of 1/2. That's on the 2011 paper of the same author as you link above—same method: different equation.

But for Laplace, you describe a semi-analytical approach, not fully analytical approach. Section 3.1.2 of the thesis. There is no reference there.

slayton58 commented 9 years ago

Ok, I was getting confused — I also had Fata’s analytical approach implemented for Laplace, just the semi-analytical method was faster and produced good enough results for my purposes. The reference you suggested earlier in this thread is the correct one for the semi-analytical approach

On Jun 3, 2015, at 10:50 AM, Lorena A. Barba notifications@github.com wrote:

That's not the method you describe in the thesis for the Laplace equation. For the Stokes equation, it's clear that you used Fata's formulas for elastic surface potentials, taking Poisson ratio of 1/2. That's on the 2011 paper of the same author as you link above—same method: different equation.

But for Laplace, you describe a semi-analytical approach, not fully analytical approach. Section 3.1.2 of the thesis. There is no reference there.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/barbagroup/inexact-gmres/issues/9#issuecomment-108466956.

labarba commented 9 years ago

Actually, the original reference for the semi-analytical approach is the classic reference for panel methods:

"Calculation of potential flow about arbitrary bodies," Hess, John L and Smith, AMO, Progress in Aerospace Sciences (1967)