![]() |
![]() |
ETNA - Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis
|
![]() |
Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Austrian Academy of Sciences Press
A-1011 Wien, Dr. Ignaz Seipel-Platz 2
Tel. +43-1-515 81/DW 3420, Fax +43-1-515 81/DW 3400 https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at, e-mail: verlag@oeaw.ac.at |
![]() |
|
DATUM, UNTERSCHRIFT / DATE, SIGNATURE
BANK AUSTRIA CREDITANSTALT, WIEN (IBAN AT04 1100 0006 2280 0100, BIC BKAUATWW), DEUTSCHE BANK MÜNCHEN (IBAN DE16 7007 0024 0238 8270 00, BIC DEUTDEDBMUC)
|
ETNA - Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis, pp. 394-401, 2023/04/25
Penalizing incompressibility in the Stokes problem leads, under mildassumptions, to matrices with condition numbers $\kappa =\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon ^{-1}h^{-2})$, with $\varepsilon =$ penalty parameter $\ll1$ and$h= $ meshwidth $<1$. Although $\kappa =\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^{-1}h^{-2}) $ is large, practical tests seldom report difficulty in solvingthese systems. In the SPD case, using the conjugate gradient method, thisis usually explained by spectral gaps occurring in the penalized coefficientmatrix. Herein we point out a second contributing factor. Since the solutionis approximately incompressible, solution components in the eigenspacesassociated with the penalty terms can be small. As a result, the effective condition number can be much smaller than the standard condition number.
Keywords: penalty method, effective condition number