encounters with maxwell equations
play

Encounters with Maxwell Equations Martin Costabel IRMAR, Universit - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Encounters with Maxwell Equations Martin Costabel IRMAR, Universit de Rennes 1 Analysis and Numerics of Acoustic and Electromagnetic Problems Linz, 1722 October 2016 Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz,


  1. Encounters with Maxwell Equations Martin Costabel IRMAR, Université de Rennes 1 Analysis and Numerics of Acoustic and Electromagnetic Problems Linz, 17–22 October 2016 Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 1 / 38

  2. Stories of Encounters with Maxwell equations Four stories were planned: Strong Ellipticity: Beginning 1982 1 Maxwell Corner Singularities: Beginning 1997 2 Approximation of Eigenvalue Problems: Beginning 2002 3 Volume Integral Equations: Beginning 2005 4 1 and Today: Only Stories 3 Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 2 / 38

  3. Story 1: Strong ellipticity Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 3 / 38

  4. The Beginning R. C. MacCamy and E. Stephan. A boundary element method for an exterior problem for three-dimensional Maxwell’s equations. Applicable Anal. , 16(2):141–163, 1983. R. C. MacCamy and E. Stephan. Solution procedures for three-dimensional eddy current problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 101(2):348–379, 1984. M. Costabel and E. P . Stephan. Strongly elliptic boundary integral equations for electromagnetic transmission problems. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A , 109(3-4):271–296, 1988. M. Costabel. A coercive bilinear form for Maxwell’s equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 157(2):527–541, 1991. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 4 / 38

  5. Oberwolfach 1988 Richard C. MacCamy 26/09/1925 – 6/07/2011 Suri, Hsiao, Stephan, Costabel, Wendland, MacCamy Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 5 / 38

  6. Context: Numerical approximation of pseudodifferential equations Galerkin approximation u ∈ X : a ( u , v ) = � f , v � ∀ v ∈ X (Var) (Var h ) u h ∈ X h : a ( u h , v ) = � f , v � ∀ v ∈ X h Crucial Property: Strong ellipticity Strong ellipticity = ⇒ Gårding inequality, “ a pos. def. + compact” Result: Every Galerkin method is stable and convergent. Class of interest: Pseudodifferential operators Pseudodifferential operator A of order α with positive principal symbol ⇒ Strong ellipticity in X = H α/ 2 (Ω) , = a ( u , v ) = � Au , v � . Activity: Find relevant examples. Found: Acoustics, elasticity, fluid dynamics,... What about electromagnetics? Need to generalize strong ellipticity. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 6 / 38

  7. BIE for time-harmonic Maxwell equations The EFIE � e i κ | x − y | 1 V τ j + κ 2 ∇ τ V div τ j = E 0 V ψ ( x ) = 4 π | x − y | ψ ( y ) ds ( y ) , κ > 0 ∂ Ω Bilinear form ( u , v tangential vector fields) 1 a ( u , v ) = � Vu , v � − κ 2 � V div τ u , div τ v � • V is strongly elliptic (of order α = − 1), but a is indefinite! • Principal part (order α = + 1) not elliptic! Idea (“T-coercivity”): Replace a ( u , v ) by a ( u , T v ) with some T : X → X and prove that a ( · , T · ) is pos. def + compact. Two concretizations Keep a ( · , · ) in the computations, use T only in the theory. This works if one can find 1 T h : X h → X h that is “close” to T . Works for EFIE if T is defined by Hodge decomposition and X h are specially crafted finite elements (edge elements, discrete differential forms). Also: X = H − 1 / 2 ( div τ , ∂ Ω) . ( ∗ ) Change the equation: Replace A by T ∗ A . Then any Galerkin method will still do. 2 ( ∗ ) This would be another story, in which I only participated at the beginning. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 7 / 38

  8. The beginning of another story, later A. Buffa, M. Costabel, and D. Sheen. On traces for H ( curl , Ω) in Lipschitz domains. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 276(2):845–867, 2002. A. Buffa, M. Costabel, and C. Schwab. Boundary element methods for Maxwell’s equations on non-smooth domains. Numer. Math. , 92(4):679–710, 2002. M. Costabel and C. Safa. A boundary integral formulation of antenna problems suitable for nodal-based wavelet approximations. In Numerical mathematics and advanced applications , pages 265–271. Springer Italia, Milan, 2003. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 8 / 38

  9. Back to the MacCamy-Stephan boundary integral equation In EFIE, introduce a scalar potential m as additional unknown, and add a second equation stating that div E = 0 on the boundary. Use (∆ + κ 2 ) Vm = 0 in Ω . � V τ j + ∇ τ Vm = E 0 V div τ j − κ 2 Vm = 0 Problem: This is an elliptic (in the sense of ADN) system of pseudodifferential operators on H 1 / 2 × H − 1 / 2 , but it is not strongly elliptic.   1 0 i ξ 1 1 0 1 i ξ 2 Principal symbol   | ξ | − i ξ 1 − i ξ 2 0 Idea: Modify the system by “Gauss elimination”: Subtract div τ times the first equation from the second. If ∂ Ω is smooth, the commutator J = [ div τ , V τ ] is of lower order − 1. The system becomes � V τ j + ∇ τ Vm = E 0 J j + (∆ τ + κ 2 ) Vm = − div τ E 0   1 0 i ξ 1 1  triangular and pos. def. of orders ( − 1 , − 1 , + 1 ) . Principal symbol 0 1 i ξ 2  | ξ | | ξ | 2 0 0 This works (for smooth boundaries): Any Galerkin method is stable. No special FEM needed. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 9 / 38

  10. Interpretation, generalization to transmission problem Trying to understand: The “Dirichlet data” ( E τ , div E ) were changed into ( E τ , div E − div τ E τ ) . This mapping T Dir defines an isomorphism of H − 1 / 2 ( div ) × H − 1 / 2 to itself and also of H 1 / 2 × H − 1 / 2 to itself. τ Strong ellipticity was obtained in the latter space. There is a corresponding mapping for the “Neumann” data T Neu : ( E n , n × curl E ) �→ ( E n , n × curl E + ∇ τ E n ) Consider now the Maxwell transmission problem in regularized form: (∆ + k 2 ) u = 0 in Ω ∪ Ω c µ 2 n × u 0 , [ λ div u ] = λ 2 div u 0 [ u τ ] = u 0 τ , [ ε u n ] = ε 2 u 0 n , [ 1 1 µ n × curl u ] = on ∂ Ω Here κ, ε, µ, λ are piecewise constant, taking values κ 1 in Ω and κ 2 in Ω c . The constants κ, ε, µ are physical, λ is suitably chosen so as to enforce div u = 0 if the incident field u 0 is divergence free. We introduce Cauchy data corresponding to these jump conditions ( w , φ, ψ , v ) = ( u τ , λ div u , − 1 µ n × curl u , ε u n ) and finally the modification operator T Cauchy : ( w , φ, ψ , v ) �→ ( w , ηφ − div τ w , ψ + θ ∇ τ v , θ v ) where η, θ ∈ C are yet to be chosen. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 10 / 38

  11. The regularized Maxwell transmission problem Theorem [Costabel-Stephan 1988] Consider the “direct” boundary integral equation method for the Maxwell transmission problem, where the system of boundary integral operators A is the difference between the exterior and interior Calderón projectors for the vector Helmholtz equations, defined using the modified Cauchy data as above. If Ω is smooth, then under rather general natural conditions on κ, ε, µ , the parameters λ, η, θ can be chosen such that A is a strongly elliptic system of pseudodifferential operators defined on the boundary function space × H − 1 / 2 × H − 1 / 2 1 / 2 × H 1 / 2 . H τ τ Proof by explicit calculation of the principal symbol. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 11 / 38

  12. Replacing calculations of symbols by Green’s formula Lemma [Co 1991] Let Ω ⊂ R 3 be a bounded smooth domain and u , v ∈ C 2 (Ω) . Then � � � � curl u · curl v + div u div v + c ( u , v ) = ∇ u · ∇ v + b ( u , v ) Ω Ω � � � where c ( u , v ) = ∇ τ u n · v τ − div τ u τ v n ∂ Ω � � � b ( u , v ) = ( u τ · ∇ n ) · v τ ) + div n u n v n ∂ Ω On the left hand side, we recognize the modification of the Cauchy data: n × curl u �→ n × curl u + ∇ τ u n and div u �→ div u − div τ u τ On the right hand side, we find the curvature of the boundary, which for a C 2 boundary consists of bounded functions. Corollary For a bounded C 2 domain Ω , the bilinear form on the left hand side is strongly elliptic on H 1 (Ω) . This allows to prove the strong ellipticity of the boundary integral system studied in [Costabel-Stephan 1988] by integration by parts, without computing symbols of pseudodifferential operators. Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 12 / 38

  13. What about non-smooth domains? In the paper [Co 1991], there was a remark in the last paragraph that for a polyhedron and functions that are in X = H ( curl ) ∩ H ( div ) and have either vanishing tangential component ( X N ) or vanishing normal component ( X T ) on the boundary, this integration-by-parts formula simplifies considerably, if one knows that the function is in H 1 (Ω) . Corollary 2 [Co 1991] If Ω is a polyhedron and u ∈ H N ∪ H T , then � � | curl u | 2 + | div u | 2 � | ∇ u | 2 � = Ω Ω As a consequence, H N = X N ∩ H 1 and H T = X T ∩ H 1 are closed subspaces of X N and X T , respectively, of infinite codimension if Ω is a non-convex polyhedron in R 3 . This remark turned out to be the only part of that paper that wasn’t forgotten... It implies that approximation of elements of X N \ H N or X T \ H T by conforming finite elements is impossible. And this had consequences... Martin Costabel (Rennes) Encounters with Maxwell Equations Linz, 17/10/2016 13 / 38

Recommend


More recommend