Wave dispersion properties of compound finite elements

Abstract

Mixed finite elements use different approximation spaces for different dependent variables. Certain classes of mixed finite elements, called compatible finite elements, have been shown to exhibit a number of desirable properties for a numerical weather prediction model. In two-dimensions the lowest order element of the Raviart–Thomas based mixed element is the finite element equivalent of the widely used C-grid staggering, which is known to possess good wave dispersion properties, at least for quadrilateral grids. It has recently been proposed that building compound elements from a number of triangular Raviart–Thomas sub-elements, such that both the primal and (implied) dual grid are constructed from the same sub-elements, would allow greater flexibility in the use of different advection schemes along with the ability to build arbitrary polygonal elements. Although the wave dispersion properties of the triangular sub-elements are well understood, those of the compound elements are unknown. It would be useful to know how they compare with the non-compound elements and what properties of the triangular sub-grid elements are inherited?Here a numerical dispersion analysis is presented for the linear shallow water equations in two dimensions discretised using the lowest order compound Raviart–Thomas finite elements on regular quadrilateral and hexagonal grids. It is found that, in comparison with the well known C-grid scheme, the compound elements exhibit a more isotropic dispersion relation, with a small over estimation of the frequency for short waves compared with the relatively large underestimation for the C-grid. On a quadrilateral grid the compound elements are found to differ from the non-compound Raviart–Thomas quadrilateral elements even for uniform elements, exhibiting the influence of the underlying sub-elements. This is shown to lead to small improvements in the accuracy of the dispersion relation: the compound quadrilateral element is slightly better for gravity waves but slightly worse for inertial waves than the standard lowest order Raviart–Thomas element.