2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.enganabound.2003.10.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the block wavelet transform applied to the boundary element method

Abstract: This paper follows an earlier work by Bucher et al. [1] on the application of wavelet transforms to the boundary element method, which shows how to reuse models stored in compressed form to solve new models with the same geometry but arbitrary load cases-the so-called virtual assembly technique. The extension presented in this paper involves a new computational procedure created to perform the required twodimensional wavelet transforms by blocks, theoretically allowing the compression of matrices of arbitrary … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Applying wavelet compression to BEM for Laplace equation was developed by Bucher, et al (2004Bucher, et al ( , 2003 and Bucher and Wrobel (2002). In the earlier work of authors, development of method to elasticity problems was presented (Ebrahimnejad, 2007;Ebrahimnejad and Attarnejad, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Applying wavelet compression to BEM for Laplace equation was developed by Bucher, et al (2004Bucher, et al ( , 2003 and Bucher and Wrobel (2002). In the earlier work of authors, development of method to elasticity problems was presented (Ebrahimnejad, 2007;Ebrahimnejad and Attarnejad, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One can observe there are intersections between the performance curves of the LU solver and the GMRES(50) solver with ε = 10 −6 or 10 −16 around N = 1023 or N = 2499, which demonstrate that the investigation on the asymptotic performance behaviour of these solvers is indeed necessary for acquiring a more complete knowledge on their performance. Since the trends of variation of these performance curves are rather regular in the current coordinates, we can extrapolate them to predict the solution time of the corresponding solvers for problems with more degrees of freedom (see also Bucher et al 2002). We estimate that, for a problem with N = 20 000 degrees of freedom, the Gauss solver requires about 22.9 days to get the solution, and the LU solver needs about 3.36 h for the same thing, while the GMRES(50) solver can bring out its solution in about 50 min for ε = 10 −16 , about 11 min for ε = 10 −6 , or less than 2 min for ε = 10 −2 .…”
Section: Efficiency and Accuracymentioning
confidence: 99%