- Journal Home
- Volume 21 - 2024
- Volume 20 - 2023
- Volume 19 - 2022
- Volume 18 - 2021
- Volume 17 - 2020
- Volume 16 - 2019
- Volume 15 - 2018
- Volume 14 - 2017
- Volume 13 - 2016
- Volume 12 - 2015
- Volume 11 - 2014
- Volume 10 - 2013
- Volume 9 - 2012
- Volume 8 - 2011
- Volume 7 - 2010
- Volume 6 - 2009
- Volume 5 - 2008
- Volume 4 - 2007
- Volume 3 - 2006
- Volume 2 - 2005
- Volume 1 - 2004
Cited by
- BibTex
- RIS
- TXT
The analysis of the Multi Point Flux Approximation (MPFA) method has so far relied on the possibility of seeing it as a mixed finite element method for which the convergence is then established. This type of analysis has been successfully applied to triangles and quadrilaterals, also in the case of rough meshes. The MPFA method has however much in common with another well known conservative method: the mimetic finite difference method. We propose to formulate the MPFA O-method in a mimetic finite difference framework, in order to extend the proof of convergence to polyhedral meshes. The formulation is useful to see the close relationship between the two different methods and to see how the differences lead to different strengths. We pay special attention to the assumption needed for proving convergence by examining various cases in the section dedicated to numerical tests.
}, issn = {2617-8710}, doi = {https://doi.org/}, url = {http://global-sci.org/intro/article_detail/ijnam/648.html} }The analysis of the Multi Point Flux Approximation (MPFA) method has so far relied on the possibility of seeing it as a mixed finite element method for which the convergence is then established. This type of analysis has been successfully applied to triangles and quadrilaterals, also in the case of rough meshes. The MPFA method has however much in common with another well known conservative method: the mimetic finite difference method. We propose to formulate the MPFA O-method in a mimetic finite difference framework, in order to extend the proof of convergence to polyhedral meshes. The formulation is useful to see the close relationship between the two different methods and to see how the differences lead to different strengths. We pay special attention to the assumption needed for proving convergence by examining various cases in the section dedicated to numerical tests.