Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorJohannessen, Kjetil Andre
dc.contributor.authorRemonato, Filippo
dc.contributor.authorKvamsdal, Trond
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-16T12:17:22Z
dc.date.available2018-05-16T12:17:22Z
dc.date.created2015-06-23T14:15:12Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationComputer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2015, 291 64-101.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn0045-7825
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2498417
dc.description.abstractSmooth spline functions such as B-splines and NURBS are already an established technology in the field of computer-aided design (CAD) and have in recent years been given a lot of attention from the computer-aided engineering (CAE) community. The advantages of local refinement are obvious for anyone working in either field, and as such, several approaches have been proposed. Among others, we find the three strategies Classical Hierarchical B-splines, Truncated Hierarchical B-splines and Locally Refined B-splines. We will in this paper present these three frameworks and highlight similarities and differences between them. In particular, we will look at the function space they span and the support of the basis functions. We will then analyse the corresponding stiffness and mass matrices in terms of sparsity patterns and conditioning numbers. We show that the basis functions in general do not span the same space, and that conditioning numbers are comparable. Moreover we show that the weighting needed by the Classical Hierarchical basis to maintain partition of unity has significant implications on the conditioning numbers.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherElseviernb_NO
dc.relation.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045782515001073
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectGeometrisk Modellering for CAD/CAM/CAQnb_NO
dc.subjectGeometric Modelling for CAD/AM/CAQnb_NO
dc.subjectElementmetodernb_NO
dc.subjectFinite element methodsnb_NO
dc.subjectSplinesnb_NO
dc.subjectAdaptive metodernb_NO
dc.subjectAdaptive methodsnb_NO
dc.titleOn the similarities and differences between Classical Hierarchical, Truncated Hierarchical and LR B-splinesnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionnb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Matematikk og naturvitenskap: 400nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Mathematics and natural scienses: 400nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber64-101nb_NO
dc.source.volume291nb_NO
dc.source.journalComputer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineeringnb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cma.2015.02.031
dc.identifier.cristin1250242
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 187993nb_NO
dc.description.localcode© 2015. This is the authors’ accepted and refereed manuscript to the article. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/nb_NO
cristin.unitcode194,63,15,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for matematiske fag
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal