Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A comparison of smooth basis constructions for isogeometric analysis

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2309.04405 v2 pith:TOXKB3PF submitted 2023-09-08 math.NA cs.NA

classification math.NAcs.NA
keywords methodscomparisonmethodalmost-analysisanalysis-suitableapproximatecomplex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

In order to perform isogeometric analysis with increased smoothness on complex domains, trimming, variational coupling or unstructured spline methods can be used. The latter two classes of methods require a multi-patch segmentation of the domain, and provide continuous bases along patch interfaces. In the context of shell modeling, variational methods are widely used, whereas the application of unstructured spline methods on shell problems is rather scarce. In this paper, we therefore provide a qualitative and a quantitative comparison of a selection of unstructured spline constructions, in particular the D-Patch, Almost-$C^1$, Analysis-Suitable $G^1$ and the Approximate $C^1$ constructions. Using this comparison, we aim to provide insight into the selection of methods for practical problems, as well as directions for future research. In the qualitative comparison, the properties of each method are evaluated and compared. In the quantitative comparison, a selection of numerical examples is used to highlight different advantages and disadvantages of each method. In the latter, comparison with weak coupling methods such as Nitsche's method or penalty methods is made as well. In brief, it is concluded that the Approximate $C^1$ and Analysis-Suitable $G^1$ converge optimally in the analysis of a bi-harmonic problem, without the need of special refinement procedures. Furthermore, these methods provide accurate stress fields. On the other hand, the Almost-$C^1$ and D-Patch provide relatively easy construction on complex geometries. The Almost-$C^1$ method does not have limitations on the valence of boundary vertices, unlike the D-Patch, but is only applicable to biquadratic local bases. Following from these conclusions, future research directions are proposed, for example towards making the Approximate $C^1$ and Analysis-Suitable $G^1$ applicable to more complex geometries.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Isogeometric multi-patch shell analysis using the Geometry + Simulation Modules

    math.NA 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    A software paper presenting three new G+Smo modules for isogeometric multi-patch Kirchhoff-Love shell analysis, with the emphasis on extensibility rather than new numerical methods.

Pith tools