1 

2 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 
3 
% 
4 
% Copyright (c) 20032010 by University of Queensland 
5 
% Earth Systems Science Computational Center (ESSCC) 
6 
% http://www.uq.edu.au/esscc 
7 
% 
8 
% Primary Business: Queensland, Australia 
9 
% Licensed under the Open Software License version 3.0 
10 
% http://www.opensource.org/licenses/osl3.0.php 
11 
% 
12 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 
13 

14 

15 

16 
The acoustic wave equation governs the propagation of pressure waves. Wave 
17 
types that obey this law tend to travel in liquids or gases where shear waves 
18 
or longitudinal style wave motion is not possible. An obvious example is sound 
19 
waves. 
20 

21 
The acoustic wave equation is defined as; 
22 
\begin{equation} 
23 
\nabla ^2 p  \frac{1}{c^2} \frac{\partial ^2 p}{\partial t^2} = 0 
24 
\label{eqn:acswave} 
25 
\end{equation} 
26 
where $p$ is the pressure, $t$ is the time and $c$ is the wave velocity. In this 
27 
chapter the acoustic wave equation is demonstrated. Important steps include the 
28 
translation of the Laplacian $\nabla^2$ to the \esc general form, the stiff 
29 
equation stability criterion and solving for the displacement or acceleration solution. 
30 

31 
\section{The Laplacian in \esc} 
32 
The Laplacian operator which can be written as $\Delta$ or $\nabla^2$, is 
33 
calculated via the divergence of the gradient of the object, which in this 
34 
example is the scalar $p$. Thus we can write; 
35 
\begin{equation} 
36 
\nabla^2 p = \nabla \cdot \nabla p = 
37 
\sum_{i}^n 
38 
\frac{\partial^2 p}{\partial x^2_{i}} 
39 
\label{eqn:laplacian} 
40 
\end{equation} 
41 
For the two dimensional case in Cartesian coordinates \autoref{eqn:laplacian} 
42 
becomes; 
43 
\begin{equation} 
44 
\nabla^2 p = \frac{\partial^2 p}{\partial x^2} 
45 
+ \frac{\partial^2 p}{\partial y^2} 
46 
\end{equation} 
47 

48 
In \esc the Laplacian is calculated using the divergence representation and the 
49 
intrinsic functions \textit{grad()} and \textit{trace()}. The function 
50 
\textit{grad{}} will return the spatial gradients of an object. 
51 
For a rank 0 solution, this is of the form; 
52 
\begin{equation} 
53 
\nabla p = \left[ 
54 
\frac{\partial p}{\partial x _{0}}, 
55 
\frac{\partial p}{\partial x _{1}} 
56 
\right] 
57 
\label{eqn:grad} 
58 
\end{equation} 
59 
Larger ranked solution objects will return gradient tensors. For example, a 
60 
pressure field which acts in the directions $p _{0}$ and $p 
61 
_{1}$ would return; 
62 
\begin{equation} 
63 
\nabla p = \begin{bmatrix} 
64 
\frac{\partial p _{0}}{\partial x _{0}} & 
65 
\frac{\partial p _{1}}{\partial x _{0}} \\ 
66 
\frac{\partial p _{0}}{\partial x _{1}} & 
67 
\frac{\partial p _{1}}{\partial x _{1}} 
68 
\end{bmatrix} 
69 
\label{eqn:gradrank1} 
70 
\end{equation} 
71 

72 
\autoref{eqn:grad} corresponds to the Linear PDE general form value 
73 
$X$. Notice however, that the general form contains the term $X 
74 
_{i,j}$\footnote{This is the first derivative in the $j^{th}$ 
75 
direction for the $i^{th}$ component of the solution.}, 
76 
hence for a rank 0 object there is no need to do more then calculate the 
77 
gradient and submit it to the solver. In the case of the rank 1 or greater 
78 
object, it is also necessary to calculate the trace. This is the sum of the 
79 
diagonal in \autoref{eqn:gradrank1}. 
80 

81 
Thus when solving for equations containing the Laplacian one of two things must 
82 
be completed. If the object \verb!p! is less then rank 1 the gradient is 
83 
calculated via; 
84 
\begin{python} 
85 
gradient=grad(p) 
86 
\end{python} 
87 
and if the object is greater then or equal to a rank 1 tensor, the trace of 
88 
the gradient is calculated. 
89 
\begin{python} 
90 
gradient=trace(grad(p)) 
91 
\end{python} 
92 
These values can then be submitted to the PDE solver via the general form term 
93 
$X$. The Laplacian is then computed in the solution process by taking the 
94 
divergence of $X$. 
95 

96 
Note, if you are unsure about the rank of your tensor, the \textit{getRank} 
97 
command will return the rank of the PDE object. 
98 
\begin{python} 
99 
rank = p.getRank() 
100 
\end{python} 
101 

102 

103 
\section{Numerical Solution Stability} \label{sec:nsstab} 
104 
Unfortunately, the wave equation belongs to a class of equations called 
105 
\textbf{stiff} PDEs. These types of equations can be difficult to solve 
106 
numerically as they tend to oscillate about the exact solution, which can 
107 
eventually lead to a catastrophic failure. To counter this problem, explicitly 
108 
stable schemes like the backwards Euler method, and correct parameterisation of 
109 
the problem are required. 
110 

111 
There are two variables which must be considered for 
112 
stability when numerically trying to solve the wave equation. For linear media, 
113 
the two variables are related via; 
114 
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:freqvel} 
115 
f=\frac{v}{\lambda} 
116 
\end{equation} 
117 
The velocity $v$ that a wave travels in a medium is an important variable. For 
118 
stability the analytical wave must not propagate faster then the numerical wave 
119 
is able to, and in general, needs to be much slower then the numerical wave. 
120 
For example, a line 100m long is discretised into 1m intervals or 101 nodes. If 
121 
a wave enters with a propagation velocity of 100m/s then the travel time for 
122 
the wave between each node will be 0.01 seconds. The time step, must therefore 
123 
be significantly less then this. Of the order $10E4$ would be appropriate. 
124 

125 
The wave frequency content also plays a part in numerical stability. The 
126 
nyquistsampling theorem states that a signals bandwidth content will be 
127 
accurately represented when an equispaced sampling rate $f _{n}$ is 
128 
equal to or greater then twice the maximum frequency of the signal 
129 
$f_{s}$, or; 
130 
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:samptheorem} 
131 
f_{n} \geqslant f_{s} 
132 
\end{equation} 
133 
For example a 50Hz signal will require a sampling rate greater then 100Hz or 
134 
one sample every 0.01 seconds. The wave equation relies on a spatial frequency, 
135 
thus the sampling theorem in this case applies to the solution mesh spacing. 
136 
This relationship confirms that the frequency content of the input signal 
137 
directly affects the time discretisation of the problem. 
138 

139 
To accurately model the wave equation with high resolutions and velocities 
140 
means that very fine spatial and time discretisation is necessary for most 
141 
problems. 
142 
This requirement makes the wave equation arduous to 
143 
solve numerically due to the large number of time iterations required in each 
144 
solution. Models with very high velocities and frequencies will be the worst 
145 
affected by this problem. 
146 

147 
\section{Displacement Solution} 
148 
\sslist{example07a.py} 
149 

150 
We begin the solution to this PDE with the centred difference formula for the 
151 
second derivative; 
152 
\begin{equation} 
153 
f''(x) \approx \frac{f(x+h  2f(x) + f(xh)}{h^2} 
154 
\label{eqn:centdiff} 
155 
\end{equation} 
156 
substituting \autoref{eqn:centdiff} for $\frac{\partial ^2 p }{\partial t ^2}$ 
157 
in \autoref{eqn:acswave}; 
158 
\begin{equation} 
159 
\nabla ^2 p  \frac{1}{c^2h^2} \left[p_{(t+1)}  2p_{(t)} + 
160 
p_{(t1)} \right] 
161 
= 0 
162 
\label{eqn:waveu} 
163 
\end{equation} 
164 
Rearranging for $p_{(t+1)}$; 
165 
\begin{equation} 
166 
p_{(t+1)} = c^2 h^2 \nabla ^2 p_{(t)} +2p_{(t)}  
167 
p_{(t1)} 
168 
\end{equation} 
169 
this can be compared with the general form of the \modLPDE module and it 
170 
becomes clear that $D=1$, $X_{i,j}=c^2 h^2 \nabla ^2 p_{(t)}$ and 
171 
$Y=2p_{(t)}  p_{(t1)}$. 
172 

173 
The solution script is similar to others that we have created in previous 
174 
chapters. The general steps are; 
175 
\begin{enumerate} 
176 
\item The necessary libraries must be imported. 
177 
\item The domain needs to be defined. 
178 
\item The time iteration and control parameters need to be defined. 
179 
\item The PDE is initialised with source and boundary conditions. 
180 
\item The time loop is started and the PDE is solved at consecutive time steps. 
181 
\item All or select solutions are saved to file for visualisation later on. 
182 
\end{enumerate} 
183 

184 
Parts of the script which warrant more attention are the definition of the 
185 
source, visualising the source, the solution time loop and the VTK data export. 
186 

187 
\subsection{Pressure Sources} 
188 
As the pressure is a scalar, one need only define the pressure for two 
189 
time steps prior to the start of the solution loop. Two known solutions are 
190 
required because the wave equation contains a double partial derivative with 
191 
respect to time. This is often a good opportunity to introduce a source to the 
192 
solution. This model has the source located at it's centre. The source should 
193 
be smooth and cover a number of samples to satisfy the frequency stability 
194 
criterion. Small sources will generate high frequency signals. Here, when using 
195 
a rectangular domain, the source is defined by a cosine function. 
196 
\begin{python} 
197 
U0=0.01 # amplitude of point source 
198 
xc=[500,500] #location of point source 
199 
# define small radius around point xc 
200 
src_radius = 30 
201 
# for first two time steps 
202 
u=U0*(cos(length(xxc)*3.1415/src_radius)+1)*\ 
203 
whereNegative(length(xxc)src_radius) 
204 
u_m1=u 
205 
\end{python} 
206 

207 
\subsection{Visualising the Source} 
208 
There are two options for visualising the source. The first is to export the 
209 
initial conditions of the model to VTK, which can be interpreted as a scalar 
210 
surface in Mayavi2. The second is to take a cross section of the model which 
211 
will require the \textit{Locator} function. 
212 
First \verb!Locator! must be imported; 
213 
\begin{python} 
214 
from esys.escript.pdetools import Locator 
215 
\end{python} 
216 
The function can then be used on the domain to locate the nearest domain node 
217 
to the point or points of interest. 
218 

219 
It is now necessary to build a list of $(x,y)$ locations that specify where are 
220 
model slice will go. This is easily implemented with a loop; 
221 
\begin{python} 
222 
cut_loc=[] 
223 
src_cut=[] 
224 
for i in range(ndx/2ndx/10,ndx/2+ndx/10): 
225 
cut_loc.append(xstep*i) 
226 
src_cut.append([xstep*i,xc[1]]) 
227 
\end{python} 
228 
We then submit the output to \verb!Locator! and finally return the appropriate 
229 
values using the \verb!getValue! function. 
230 
\begin{python} 
231 
src=Locator(mydomain,src_cut) 
232 
src_cut=src.getValue(u) 
233 
\end{python} 
234 
It is then a trivial task to plot and save the output using \mpl 
235 
(\autoref{fig:cxsource}). 
236 
\begin{python} 
237 
pl.plot(cut_loc,src_cut) 
238 
pl.axis([xc[0]src_radius*3,xc[0]+src_radius*3,0.,2*U0]) 
239 
pl.savefig(os.path.join(savepath,"source_line.png")) 
240 
\end{python} 
241 
\begin{figure}[h] 
242 
\centering 
243 
\includegraphics[width=6in]{figures/sourceline.png} 
244 
\caption{Cross section of the source function.} 
245 
\label{fig:cxsource} 
246 
\end{figure} 
247 

248 

249 
\subsection{Point Monitoring} 
250 
In the more general case where the solution mesh is irregular or specific 
251 
locations need to be monitored, it is simple enough to use the \textit{Locator} 
252 
function. 
253 
\begin{python} 
254 
rec=Locator(mydomain,[250.,250.]) 
255 
\end{python} 
256 
When the solution \verb u is updated we can extract the value at that point 
257 
via; 
258 
\begin{python} 
259 
u_rec=rec.getValue(u) 
260 
\end{python} 
261 
For consecutive time steps one can record the values from \verb!u_rec! in an 
262 
array initialised as \verb!u_rec0=[]! with; 
263 
\begin{python} 
264 
u_rec0.append(rec.getValue(u)) 
265 
\end{python} 
266 

267 
It can be useful to monitor the value at a single or multiple individual points 
268 
in the model during the modelling process. This is done using 
269 
the \verb!Locator! function. 
270 

271 

272 
\section{Acceleration Solution} 
273 
\sslist{example07b.py} 
274 

275 
An alternative method to the displacement solution, is to solve for the 
276 
acceleration $\frac{\partial ^2 p}{\partial t^2}$ directly. The displacement can 
277 
then be derived from the acceleration after a solution has been calculated 
278 
The acceleration is given by a modified form of \autoref{eqn:waveu}; 
279 
\begin{equation} 
280 
\nabla ^2 p  \frac{1}{c^2} a = 0 
281 
\label{eqn:wavea} 
282 
\end{equation} 
283 
and can be solved directly with $Y=0$ and $X=c^2 \nabla ^2 p_{(t)}$. 
284 
After each iteration the displacement is reevaluated via; 
285 
\begin{equation} 
286 
p_{(t+1)}=2p_{(t)}  p_{(t1)} + h^2a 
287 
\end{equation} 
288 

289 
\subsection{Lumping} 
290 
For \esc, the acceleration solution is prefered as it allows the use of matrix 
291 
lumping. Lumping or mass lumping as it is sometimes known, is the process of 
292 
aggressively approximating the density elements of a mass matrix into the main 
293 
diagonal. The use of Lumping is motivaed by the simplicity of diagonal matrix 
294 
inversion. As a result, Lumping can significantly reduce the computational 
295 
requirements of a problem. Care should be taken however, as this 
296 
function can only be used when the $A$, $B$ and $C$ coefficients of the 
297 
general form are zero. 
298 

299 
To turn lumping on in \esc one can use the command; 
300 
\begin{python} 
301 
mypde.getSolverOptions().setSolverMethod(mypde.getSolverOptions().LUMPING) 
302 
\end{python} 
303 
It is also possible to check if lumping is set using; 
304 
\begin{python} 
305 
print mypde.isUsingLumping() 
306 
\end{python} 
307 

308 
\section{Stability Investigation} 
309 
It is now prudent to investigate the stability limitations of this problem. 
310 
First, we let the frequency content of the source be very small. If we define 
311 
the source as a cosine input, then the wavlength of the input is equal to the 
312 
radius of the source. Let this value be 5 meters. Now, if the maximum velocity 
313 
of the model is $c=380.0ms^{1}$, then the source 
314 
frequency is $f_{r} = \frac{380.0}{5} = 76.0 Hz$. This is a worst case 
315 
scenario with a small source and the models maximum velocity. 
316 

317 
Furthermore, we know from \autoref{sec:nsstab}, that the spatial sampling 
318 
frequency must be at least twice this value to ensure stability. If we assume 
319 
the model mesh is a square equispaced grid, 
320 
then the sampling interval is the side length divided by the number of samples, 
321 
given by $\Delta x = \frac{1000.0m}{400} = 2.5m$ and the maximum sampling 
322 
frequency capable at this interval is 
323 
$f_{s}=\frac{380.0ms^{1}}{2.5m}=152Hz$ this is just equal to the 
324 
required rate satisfying \autoref{eqn:samptheorem}. 
325 

326 
\autoref{fig:ex07sampth} depicts three examples where the grid has been 
327 
undersampled, sampled correctly, and over sampled. The grids used had 
328 
200, 400 and 800 nodes per side respectively. Obviously, the oversampled grid 
329 
retains the best resolution of the modelled wave. 
330 

331 
The time step required for each of these examples is simply calculated from 
332 
the propagation requirement. For a maximum velocity of $380.0ms^{1}$, 
333 
\begin{subequations} 
334 
\begin{equation} 
335 
\Delta t \leq \frac{1000.0m}{200} \frac{1}{380.0} = 0.013s 
336 
\end{equation} 
337 
\begin{equation} 
338 
\Delta t \leq \frac{1000.0m}{400} \frac{1}{380.0} = 0.0065s 
339 
\end{equation} 
340 
\begin{equation} 
341 
\Delta t \leq \frac{1000.0m}{800} \frac{1}{380.0} = 0.0032s 
342 
\end{equation} 
343 
\end{subequations} 
344 
Observe that for each doubling of the number of nodes in the mesh, we halve 
345 
the time step. To illustrate the impact this has, consider our model. If the 
346 
source is placed at the center, it is $500m$ from the nearest boundary. With a 
347 
velocity of $380.0ms^{1}$ it will take $\approx1.3s$ for the wavefront to 
348 
reach that boundary. In each case, this equates to $100$, $200$ and $400$ time 
349 
steps. This is again, only a best case scenario, for true stability these time 
350 
values may need to be halved and possibly halved again. 
351 

352 
\begin{figure}[ht] 
353 
\centering 
354 
\subfigure[Undersampled Example]{ 
355 
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth,trim=0cm 6cm 5cm 6cm 
356 
,clip]{figures/ex07usamp.png} 
357 
\label{fig:ex07usamp} 
358 
} 
359 
\subfigure[Just sampled Example]{ 
360 
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth,trim=0cm 6cm 5cm 6cm 
361 
,clip]{figures/ex07jsamp.png} 
362 
\label{fig:ex07jsamp} 
363 
} 
364 
\subfigure[Over sampled Example]{ 
365 
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth,trim=0cm 6cm 5cm 6cm 
366 
,clip]{figures/ex07nsamp.png} 
367 
\label{fig:ex07nsamp} 
368 
} 
369 
\caption{Sampling Theorem example for stability 
370 
investigation.} 
371 
\label{fig:ex07sampth} 
372 
\end{figure} 
373 

374 

375 

376 

377 
