Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Studies of an infinite element method for acoustical radiation

Jean-Christophe Autrique a, Frédéric Magoulès b,*

a
LMS International, Interleuvenlaan 70, Researchpark Haasrode Z1, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
b
Institut Elie Cartan de Nancy, Université Henri Poincaré, BP 239, 54506 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy Cedex, France

Received 11 July 2005; received in revised form 2 August 2005; accepted 8 August 2005
Available online 22 December 2005

Abstract

Infinite element computations are very efficient for predicting the vibro-acoustic response and sensitivities of a vibrating
structure for an exterior acoustic domain. In addition, domain decomposition methods are very powerful algorithms for
solving large linear systems in parallel. In this paper, an infinite element method is proposed and analyzed for parallel com-
putations purpose. An original formulation of this method with Lagrange multipliers defined on (semi-)infinite space is
presented. The implementation aspects of this method in an industrial acoustic software (SYSNOISE) are discussed.
New numerical results illustrate the efficiency of the proposed method for realistic acoustical radiation problems.
 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Infinite element; Finite element; Acoustic radiation; SYSNOISE; Domain decomposition method; Parallel computing

1. Introduction

The infinite element method [1–3] is an elegant extension of the finite element method [4–6] which allows for
the modelling of exterior acoustic problems. Such exterior problems involve unbounded media and require an
appropriate treatment of the Sommerfeld radiation condition. The formulation of infinite elements relies on a
truncated multipole expansion [7,8] of the acoustic field outside a regular convex surface enclosing acoustic
sources. Such a multipole expansion can be expressed in various separable coordinate systems as spherical,
spheroidal or ellipsoidal coordinates, for instance. In contrast with conventional finite elements [4–6], infinite
elements [3,9] incorporate frequency dependent interpolation functions along the radial (outward) direction.
Interpolation (or trial) functions are supplemented by appropriate test functions: the particular infinite ele-
ments available in SYSNOISE software rely on a conjugated formulation where test functions are basically
complex conjugates of trial functions [10]. This particular choice avoids highly oscillating functions in element
integrals, and so far standard Gauss–Legendre quadratures can be used for integrating element contributions.
An additional benefit of such conjugated infinite elements is related to the particular frequency dependence of
element contributions which remains polynomial as for conventional acoustic elements. These features allow

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 383 684564; fax: +33 383 684534.
E-mail addresses: jean-christophe.autrique@lms.be (J.-C. Autrique), frederic.magoules@iecn.u-nancy.fr (F. Magoulès).

0307-904X/$ - see front matter  2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apm.2005.08.022
642 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

for the use of efficient solution techniques as iterative Krylov methods for instance [11]. The linear system
obtained after the discretization consists of a sparse matrix. The dimension of this matrix increases proportion-
ally with the number of finite and infinite elements, and with the order of the infinite elements too. When dealing
with large size problems and high frequencies, the iterative methods meet some difficulties to converge [11].
Generally speaking, the solution of acoustic problems, involving large meshes and high order elements,
requires a large amount of memory and a high computation time. The domain decomposition methods allow
to solve a large problem in a more reasonable amount of time [12–16]. Indeed, the discrete linear system
obtained from a finite or an infinite element method over a large mesh leads to a matrix with a large bandwidth.
If the physical mesh is partitioned into several sub-domains and if each sub-domain is allocated to one process,
the local bandwidths are smaller than the whole model bandwidth [12,17,18]. This creates a gain both in mem-
ory and computing time. A reformulation of the mathematical problem with Lagrange multipliers leads to a
linear system defined on the interface between the sub-domains. In SYSNOISE [19], two iterative solvers are
available to solve this linear system defined on the interface. The BiCGstab [20] algorithm is based on the con-
jugate gradient method, and the GMRES [20] (generalized minimum residual) algorithm is designed to solve
efficiently non-symmetric linear system. Communications between the different processes, involved during
the iterative algorithm, are handled with a message passing interface library (MPI). The speed-up obtained
by parallelization depends on the size of the interface between the sub-domains and the speed of the network.
In this paper, an infinite element method is proposed and analyzed for parallel computations purpose. The
implementation aspects in an industrial software (SYSNOISE) are then discussed. The scope of this paper is as
follows. Section 2 describes the general radiation problem analyzed in the following. Then, in Section 3 the
conjugate infinite element method is reminded. Section 4 presents a domain decomposition method well suited
for parallel acoustics computations. An original formulation of this method with Lagrange multipliers defined
on (semi-)infinite space is introduced. In Section 5, implementation aspects of this method in an industrial
software (SYSNOISE) are detailed. In Section 6, new numerical experiments are presented on large compu-
tational acoustics problems which demonstrate the performance and robustness of the proposed domain
decomposition method. This analysis investigates the dependency of the domain decomposition method upon
different parameters for general mesh partitioning obtained with the METIS software. Three-dimensional
analysis performed on academic and industrial test cases are presented. The conclusions of this paper are pre-
sented in Section 7.

2. Acoustical radiation problem

A model radiation problem is considered in an unbounded domain. The main motivation for this analysis is
to determine the frequency response functions arising from the vibrations of a structure. In the following the
radiation of an object delimited by a boundary CN immersed in an unbounded domain Xe is considered. This
model problem can be expressed as the following system of equations:

Mu  k 2 u ¼ 0 in Xe ;
ou
¼ g on CN ; ð2:1Þ
on 
ou 
  iku ¼ Oð1=r2 Þ when r ! þ1;
 or 

where g 2 L2 ðCN Þ is the prescribed Neumann boundary conditions and k 2 Rþ the wave number. The normal
unitary vector along the boundary CN is denoted by n, and r represents the radius in the spherical coordinates.

3. Infinite element method

3.1. Principles

In order to apply the infinite element method to the analysis of an acoustical radiation problem, involving a
non-convex object like an engine for instance, a convex envelope surrounding this object should first be
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 643

defined. The volume between the object and the convex envelope is then meshed with finite elements [4–6] and
infinite elements [9,10] are defined on the surface of the convex envelope. An example of such a mesh is shown
in Fig. 1 for a two-dimensional case. In the general case, the first step consists of defining a truncation of the
unbounded domain Xe called Xi;e c as

Xi;e e 3
c ¼ X \ fx 2 R ; jxj < cg;

where the artificial boundary Sc (here, the sphere of radius c > 1) has been introduced. The bounded domain
Xi;e i;e
c is meshed with finite elements. The exterior of the domain Xc is then defined by

Xo;e 3
c ¼ fx 2 R ; c < jxjg

and is meshed with infinite elements ðXe ¼ Xi;e o;e

c [ Xc Þ. The optimal distance between the object and the arti-
ficial boundary Sc depends of the order of the infinite elements considered [1–3].

3.2. Variational formulation

The variational formulation of the problem differs in the domain Xi;e o;e
c and in the domain Xc .
i;e
In the domain Xc , the Helmholtz equation is first multiplied by the complex conjugate of the test function v
(noted v). The integration in the domain Xi;e
c is then performed, and the Green formula is applied. The solution
u belongs to the space
H 1 ðXi;e
c Þ ¼ fu : kuk1 < 1g

with kuk1 the norm associated to the scalar product

Z Z
ðu; vÞ1 ¼ rurv dV þ uv dV ;
Xci;e Xci;e

where dV denotes the volume integration. After substitution of the Neumann boundary condition on CN, the
following variational formulation is obtained: Find u 2 H 1 ðXi;e
c Þ such as
Z Z Z
rurv dV  k 2 uv dV ¼ gv dS
Xci;e Xci;e CN

for 8v 2 H 1
ðXi;e
c Þ
2
and g 2 L ðCN Þ, where dS denotes the surface integration.

ΓN

Fig. 1. Mesh around the object. This mesh is composed with finite and infinite elements.
644 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

In the domain Xo;e

c , a preliminary truncation of this unbounded domain should be performed, which gives
an annulus defined by

Xo;e 3
c;d ¼ fx 2 R ; c < jxj < dg;

where the artificial boundary Sd (here, the sphere of radius d > c) has been introduced. The domain Xo;e
c;d sat-
isfies the relation

lim Xo;e o;e

c;d ¼ Xc .
d!þ1

After the multiplication of the Helmholtz equation by the complex conjugate of the test function v, and the
application of the Green formula, we obtain:
Z Z Z
2 ou
rurv dV  k uv dV  v dS ¼ 0.
Xo;e
c;d
Xo;e
c;d
Sd or

The Sommerfeld condition Eq. (2.1) can be expressed as

ou
¼ iku þ /;
or

where / = O(1/r2) is an unknown function. After substitution in the variational formulation (because ou/
on = ou/or), the equation can be re-written as
Z Z Z Z
2
rurv dV  k uv dV  ik uv dS ¼ /v dS.
Xo;e
c;d
Xo;e
c;d
Sd Sd

The second steps consist of taking the limit of the previous expression when d tend to infinity. The Atkinson–
Wilcox results [9] show that the leading term of the solution u is of the form eikr/r. As a consequence, u and $u
can no longer be integrated to infinity over L2 . The idea consists of using special shape functions of the form
O(1/r3). This helps to consider the previous integral as Lebesgue integral. With this choice, the integral on Sd
with / vanishes when d tends to infinity. The problem is that the integral on Sd with u vanishes too. In other
words, this particular choice of the tests functions does not allow to keep the Sommerfeld condition in the
variational formulation. An idea proposed in [8] consists of introducing the Sommerfeld condition directly
in the definition of the space. The solution u belongs to the Sobolev weighted space
o;e þ
H 1;þ
w ðXc Þ ¼ fu : kuk1;w < 1g

with kukþ1;w the norm associated to the scalar product

Z Z Z   
þ ou ov
ðu; vÞ1;w ¼ wrurv dV þ wuv dV þ  iku  ikv dV .
Xo;e
c Xo;e
c Xo;e
c
or or

Two common weights are of interest, w = 1/r2 and the dual weight w* = r2. With these notations, the varia-
o;e
tional formulation can be written: Find u 2 H 1;þ
w ðXc Þ such as
Z Z
rurv dV  k 2 uv dV ¼ 0
Xo;e
c Xo;e
c

for 8v 2 H 1;þ o;e 2

w ðXc Þ and g 2 L ðCN Þ.

Remark 3.1. In order not to overload the equations, no boundary conditions have been considered along Sc
for the variational formulation in the domain Xi;e o;e
c , neither for the variational formulation in the domain Xc .
Indeed after application of the Green formula, the terms associated to this boundary condition are equal and
of opposite signs, and thus vanish in the variational formulation in the complete domain Xe.
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 645

3.3. Discretization

In the domain Xi;e

c meshed with finite elements, the approximate solution, in the cartesian coordinates sys-
tem denoted by (x, y, z) in the current finite element and by (n, g, f) in the reference finite element, can be
expressed in the form
X
ne
uh ðn; g; fÞ ¼ aj N j ðn; g; fÞ
j¼1

with aj the ne unknown complex coefficients associated to the degree of freedom and Nj the basis shape func-
tions defined on the reference finite element. For example ne = 8 in the case of a discretization with Q1 shape
functions defined on hexahedra elements.
In the domain Xo;ec meshed with infinite elements, the exact solution, in the spherical coordinates system
(r, h, u) of the current infinite element, can be expended in the form (Atkinson–Wilkox):

X1
Gj ðh; u; kÞ
uðr; h; uÞ ¼ eikr . ð3:1Þ
j¼1
rj

This series converges for r > c. Considering only the first m terms of this series, and expressing theses terms in
the coordinates systems (n, g, r) of the reference infinite element leads to the approximate solution:

Xm e
G l ðn; g; kÞ
uh ðn; g; rÞ ¼ eikr ;
l¼1
rl

e l ðn; g; kÞ are defined by

where the functions G

X
n
e l ðn; g; kÞ ¼
G Qm;l ðkÞN m ðn; gÞ
m¼1

with n an integer defined below. After substitution, the following expression is obtained:

X
ne
uh ðn; g; rÞ ¼ aj N j ðn; g; rÞ with N j ðn; g; rÞ ¼ N m ðn; gÞN l ðrÞ
j¼1

for m = 1  n, l = 1  m, ne = n · m, and with aj the ne unknowns complex coefficients associated to the degree
of freedom. The shapes functions Nj are defined on the reference infinite element: Nm denotes the angular func-
tions with a total number of n and Nl the radial functions with a total number of m. The integer m is called the
order of the infinite element. The highest this order, the smallest the error between the approximate solution
and the exact solution.
In the following, the subscript fem and ifem denotes the discretization with finite elements and with infinite
elements respectively. If the degrees of freedom located in the domain Xi;e c , then the degrees of freedom located
in the domain Xo;e c , and finally the degrees of freedom located on the sphere Sc are successively numbered, the
linear block matrix is obtained:
0 ðfemÞ ðfemÞ
10 1 0 1
Z ii 0 Z ip ðfemÞ ðfemÞ
xi bi
B CB ðifemÞ C B C
B 0
ðifemÞ
Z ii
ðifemÞ
Z ip C@ x A¼B bi
ðifemÞ C. ð3:2Þ
@ A i @ A
ðfemÞ ðifemÞ ðfemÞ ðifemÞ
Z pi Z pi Z ðfemÞ
pp þ Z ðifemÞ
pp
x p b p þ b p

The matrix Z denotes the impedance matrix equal to K  k2M where K is the volume stiffness matrix and M is
the volume mass matrix, associated to the variational formulation. The quantity x and b denote the unknown
and the right-hand side vectors respectively.
646 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

4. Parallel computing

4.1. Non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm

In order to solve the previous linear system, the non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm with absorbing bound-
ary conditions defined on the interface between the sub-domains is considered [21,22]. The case of a general
domain X partitioned into two sub-domains X(1) and X(2) with an interface C is now considered, as shown in
Fig. 2. The degrees of freedom located inside sub-domain X(s), s = 1, 2 and on the interface C are denoted by
subscripts i and p. With this notation the contribution of sub-domain X(s), s = 1, 2 to the impedance matrix
and to the right-hand side can be written as in [12,13,17]
ðsÞ ðsÞ
! ðsÞ
!
Z ii Z ip b i
Z ðsÞ ¼ ðsÞ
; bðsÞ ¼ ðsÞ
; s ¼ 1; 2.
Z pi Z ðsÞ
pp
b p

The global problem is a block system obtained by assembling the local contributions from each sub-domain
0 ð1Þ 10
Z ii 0 Z ip
ð1Þ ð1Þ 1 0 ð1Þ 1
xi b
B C ð2Þ C B ið2Þ C
B 0 Z ð2Þ Z ð2Þ CB
@ ii ip A@ xi A ¼ @ bi A. ð4:1Þ
ð1Þ ð2Þ
Z pi Z pi Z pp xp bp

The matrices Z ð1Þ ð2Þ

pp and Z pp represent the interaction matrices between the nodes on the interface obtained by
integration on X and on X(2). The block Zpp is the sum of these two blocks. In a same way the term
(1)

bp ¼ bpð1Þ þ bpð2Þ is obtained by local integration of the right-hand side over each sub-domain and the summa-
tion on the interface.
The non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm involves an iterative method (performed on the degrees of free-
dom located on the interface) and a direct method (performed on the degrees of freedom located inside each
sub-domain) [22–24]. This algorithm is based on the equivalence of the problem (4.1) with the following cou-
pled problems:
ð1Þ ð1Þ
! ð1Þ ! ð1Þ
!
Z ii Z ip xi bi
¼ ð1Þ
; ð4:2Þ
ð1Þ
Z pi Z pp ð1Þ
þ Að1Þ xpð1Þ bð1Þ
p þk
ð2Þ ð2Þ
! ð2Þ ! ð2Þ
!
Z ii Z ip xi bi
¼ ð2Þ
ð4:3Þ
ð2Þ
Z pi Z pp ð2Þ
þ Að2Þ xpð2Þ bð2Þ
p þk

under the continuity constraints

xpð1Þ  xpð2Þ ¼ 0; ð4:4Þ
ð1Þ ð2Þ
k þk  Að1Þ xpð1Þ  Að2Þ xpð2Þ ¼ 0. ð4:5Þ

(2)
Ω
(1)
Ω

Γ
Fig. 2. Mesh partitioning of a general domain into two non-overlapping sub-domains.
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 647

The additional unknowns k(1), k(2) are called Lagrange multipliers and the matrices A(1), A(2) are so called aug-
ð1Þ ð2Þ
mented matrices. The elimination of xi and xi in favor of xpð1Þ and xpð2Þ in the previous equations leads to the
following linear system:
F k ¼ d; ð4:6Þ
where the matrix F, the unknown vector k and the right-hand side d are defined by
! !
1
I I  ðAð1Þ þ Að2Þ Þ½S ð2Þ þ Að2Þ  kð1Þ
; ;
I  ðAð1Þ þ Að2Þ Þ½S ð1Þ þ Að1Þ 
1
I kð2Þ
!
ðAð1Þ þ Að2Þ Þ½S ð2Þ þ Að2Þ 1 cpð2Þ
1
;
ðAð1Þ þ Að2Þ Þ½S ð1Þ þ Að1Þ  cpð1Þ
ðqÞ ðqÞ 1 ðqÞ ðqÞ ðqÞ 1 ðqÞ
where S ðqÞ ¼ Z pp
ðqÞ
 Z pi ½Z ii  Z ip is the condensed matrix and cpðqÞ ¼ bpðqÞ  Z pi ½Z ii  bi is the condensed
right-hand side, for q = 1, 2. As already discussed, this linear system is solved with an iterative method, and
each iteration involves a solution with a direct method of an Helmholtz sub-problem in each sub-domain.
The choice of the matrices A(1) and A(2) has a strong influence on the convergence speed of the non-over-
lapping Schwarz algorithm. Different choice of these matrices has been investigated in [22,23,25,26]. In the
following the matrices A(1) and A(2) are obtained from a Taylor zeroth order approximation of the Stek-
lov–Poincaré operator and from an optimized zeroth order approximation of the Steklov–Poincaré operator,
as introduced in [21]. These matrices are equal to
Að1Þ ¼ aM C ; Að2Þ ¼ aM C ;
where a is equal to ik for a Taylor zeroth order approximation and obtained from the solution of a minimi-
zation problem for an optimized zeroth order approximation [21,18]. The matrix MC is a surface mass matrix
defined on the interface between the sub-domains.

4.2. Iterative solution of the interface problem

An iterative algorithm is considered for the solution of the interface problem, namely the GMRES(m). At
each iteration of this algorithm, only one matrix-vector product by the matrix F is required.
The conjugate gradient method is designed for Hermitian positive definite matrices and the work per iter-
ation is usually dominated by the matrix-vector product with F. The storage of five vectors of the dimension of
k is required. The method is optimal since it minimizes the error in the F-norm and has a smooth convergence
behavior. For non-Hermitian matrices, other methods must be used. The GMRES(m) method, proposed by
Saad [20], keeps the property of optimal and smooth convergence behavior, but the memory requirements can
be large, since the basis vectors of a large Krylov space should be stored. The GMRES algorithm have shown
robust convergence for acoustics problem [27,28]. One step of GMRES(m), as defined in the following algo-
rithm, by 3.1–3.7 requires one matrix-vector product. The quantity xH denotes the complex conjugate trans-
pose of x. The quantity TOL is the residual tolerance used for the stopping criterion.

GMRES algorithm for the solution of the interface problem

1. Compute the residual r = d  Fk0, and compute b = krk.

2. First basis vector: v1 = r/b.
3. For j = 1, . . . , m.
3.1. Compute wj = Fvj.
H
3.2. Comput0e Gram–Schmidt coefficients: hij ¼ vP i wj ; i ¼ 1; . . . ; j.
j
3.3. Gram–Schmidt orthogonalization: wj ¼ wj  i¼1 hij vi .
3.4. Normalization: vj+1 = wj/hj+1,j with hj+1,j = kwjk.
ðjþ1;jÞ
3.5. Let H j ¼ ½hil ði;jÞ¼ð1;1Þ with hil = 0 for i > l + 1.
3.6. Solve the least squares problem Hjzj = be1.
3.7. Update the solution k = k0 + [v1, . . . , vj]zj.
648 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

4. Compute r = d  Fk.
5. If krk > TOL, set k0 = k, and go to step 1.

The parallel solution of the linear system (Fk = d) takes place as follows. The vectors k, d as well as the
iteration vectors are distributed in the same way among the processors of the distributed computer. The oper-
ations on the vectors of large dimension are all carried out in parallel. This does not require communication
between processors for vector updates (y y + ax) since this operation can be carried out for each compo-
nent of y independently, but communication is required for the inner product f = xHy. The other operations
are carried out simultaneously without communication on each processor.

4.3. Case of (semi-)infinite interface

The block form of the linear system (4.1) is very similar to the linear system (3.2), and can be assimilated to
the case of an interface between a sub-domain composed with finite elements only, with a sub-domain com-
posed with infinite elements only. When a general mesh partitioning of the global domain is performed, the
interface joins some (finite or infinite) elements sharing a common edge on the interface and belonging to dif-
ferent sub-domains. Three possibilities may appear: two finite elements sharing an edge on the interface, or
one finite element and one infinite element sharing an edge on the interface, or two infinite elements sharing
an edge on the interface. In this last case the length of the interface is infinite.
If some Lagrange finite elements are considered, for example P1 -finite elements, the degrees of freedom of
an element corresponds to the nodes of the triangle. Defining the Lagrange multipliers at the nodes of the
finite element helps to apply the sub-structuring methodology described in (4.1). Fig. 3 shows the definition
of the degrees of freedom and of the Lagrange multipliers for two finite elements sharing one edge on the
interface.
In the second case, the Lagrange multipliers should be defined at the element nodes as shown in Fig. 4.
Indeed in this case, the restriction on the edge of the angular basis functions of the infinite element is similar
to the restriction of the P1 -finite element basis functions. As a consequence, there is no difference between this
case and the previous one.
In the third case, the Lagrange multipliers should be defined at the element nodes and at the Gauss points
of the infinite elements as shown in Fig. 5. These Gauss points correspond to the degree of freedom of the
infinite element and are used to compute the integrals. Increasing the order of the infinite element implies

Fig. 3. Degree of freedom (white and black bullets) of the elements and of the Lagrange multipliers (black bullets) between two finite
elements.

Fig. 4. Degree of freedom (white and black bullets) of the elements and of the Lagrange multipliers (black bullets) between an infinite
element and a finite element.
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 649

Fig. 5. Degree of freedom (white and black bullets) of the elements and of the Lagrange multiplier (black bullets) between two infinite
elements.

increasing the number of Gauss points and so far the number of Lagrange multipliers. As a consequence the
size of the linear system defined Eq. (4.6) becomes much bigger.
In summary, the Lagrange multipliers are simply defined on the degrees of freedom. This can be the nodes
of the elements (for finite elements) or the Gauss points (for the infinite elements). If zeroth order absorbing
boundary conditions are considered in the non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm, a surface mass matrix should
be computed on the interface between the sub-domain. This matrix is of the form
Z
MC ¼ uv dS.
C

In the case of an interface between two finite elements, the coefficients of the matrix MC are computed as
Z
½M C lm ¼ N l N m dS;
Xð1Þ \Xð2Þ

where Nl and Nm are the finite element shape functions associated with node l and node m on the common
edge on the interface between sub-domains X(1) and X(2). In the case of an interface between one finite element
and one infinite element, the finite element shape functions on the common edge is similar to the angular infi-
nite element shape function i.e. the functions Nm. When two infinite elements share a common edge, the inte-
gral along this infinite edge only involves the radial shape functions i.e. the functions Nl, and the integral is
computed using the Gauss points along the infinite edge.

5. Implementation in SYSNOISE

SYSNOISE is an acoustic software developed by LMS International [19]. SYSNOISE predicts the radia-
tion, scattering and transmission of sound waves and the structural vibrations induced by the loading effects
of an acoustic fluid onto a structure. The program calculates a wide variety of results such as sound pressure
and radiated sound power, acoustic velocities and intensities, contributions of panel groups of the sounds,
energy densities, vibro-acoustic sensitivities, normal modes and structural deflections.
SYSNOISE utilizes state-of-the-art numerical methods based on direct and indirect boundary element
method (DBEM and IBEM) and a pressure formulation for acoustic finite and infinite element modelling
(FEM and I-FEM). Finite element methods are well adapted for enclosed regions, such as passenger compart-
ments, ducts or covers [27,28]. They are used to calculate the vibro-acoustic response of the cavity due to a
defined excitation, in the time or frequency domain, with the possibility to take into account flow effects. A
finite element model represents the elasticity of the fluid-loaded structure. SYSNOISE uses a complementary
infinite element method (I-FEM) to predict the vibro-acoustic response and sensitivities of a vibrating struc-
ture for an exterior acoustic domain. The method also solves coupled fluid-structure problems, and is well sui-
ted to multifluid applications.
The SYSNOISE DDT, implemented in the commercial version of SYSNOISE Revision 5.4 [19], is related
to the implementation of the optimized Schwarz algorithm into the harmonic acoustic FEM and I-FEM mod-
ule. The implemented domain decomposition technique (DDT) aims at partitioning large model, using a geo-
metric or an automatic mesh partitioning like METIS [29,30]. The elements of the mesh are connected via their
650 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

faces, which are surfaces in 3D. The elements of the global domain are decomposed into several sub-domains
by numbering or coloring all elements. All elements with the same number or color form a sub-domain. Sub-
domains are sets of elements, so the interface consists of a set of faces. The interface is defined by the faces
connected to elements with a different sub-domain number. The mesh partitioning should be done in such
a way to obtain a good load balancing among the sub-domains, and so that the number of interface nodes
is small in order to have a small interface problem. In many cases, this decomposition can be done by hand,
but for practical applications, it is often a very difficult and tedious task.
The non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm is by nature parallel: the solution can be computed independently
for each sub-domain, while the interface equation connects all the independent sub-domains into a global
problem. Because of this independence, each domain can be allocated to a single processor of the parallel sys-
tem, for example. Operations related to a single sub-domain take place without communication. The solution
of the interface problem, however, requires communication since it connects all the sub-domains. The sub-
domains are then handled by different processes which can run on different computer. The available non-over-
lapping Schwarz algorithm involves the direct solution method in each sub-domain, and an iterative solution
method for solving the interface problem. Each process uses the standard SYSNOISE procedure to solve its
own acoustic problem and communications between the process are ensured with the message passing inter-
face library (MPI). These communications are mandatory to solve the interface problem. The purpose of a
good load balancing among the sub-domains allows to provide a load balance between the various processors
allocated to the numerical treatment. The numerical benefits derive from the local bandwidth reduction (smal-
ler than the whole model bandwidth) that creates a gain both in memory space and computing time.
Since each iteration of the algorithm requires the solution of a linear system with a local impedance matrix,
it is advantageous to factorize once and perform just the forward and backward substitutions. The local
assembled finite element matrix was factorized and the local linear system was solved by the SYSNOISE
built-in direct solver, which is based on an LDLt factorization. Two iterative solvers are available for the solu-
tion of the interface problem. The BiCGstab is based on the conjugate gradient method, the GMRES (general-
ized minimum residual) is designed to solve non-symmetric linear system. In these algorithms, the
computation of vector inner products is performed by global communication commands from the MPI library
(MPI_Allreduce). The current implementation does not overlap communication and computation. Non-
blocking communication was used for the computation of the Lagrange multipliers. The communication con-
sists of a sequence of two-processor exchanges, that represent two neighboring sub-domains. These are the
MPI commands MPI_Isend, and MPI_Irecv. The other operations of the algorithms are fully parallel without
communication.

6. Numerical experiments

In this section the performance of the non-overlapping Schwarz method is evaluated for the solution of
acoustical problems arising from infinite and finite element discretization in the frequency domain. Two main
test cases have been studied for the evaluation of the Schwarz method. The first model considered here is a
simplified engine that has been used within the frame of a European project (PIANO). The second model
is an engine in free field conditions which has been used within the framework of a European project (DOM-
INOS). The objective of these two test cases is to evaluate the sound radiation generated by a normal velocity
boundary condition defined along the surface of the object. This normal velocity boundary condition is
obtained from measured vibration or calculated from a finite element analysis (FEA). From these boundary
conditions, SYSNOISE determines the radiated sound on the body surface as well as anywhere in the acoustic
field.

6.1. Simplified engine

This first example is related to a simplified engine. The objective is to evaluate the sound radiation with a
normal velocity boundary condition along the engine surface. Radiation problems are exterior problems that
can be handled quite efficiently using an infinite element model [11]. The current implementation of the non-
overlapping Schwarz algorithm has been done in such a way that infinite elements can be handled within each
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 651

sub-domain together with conventional finite elements. The conjugate infinite element formulation of first
order is here considered [3,10].
The global mesh and the mesh partitioning into three sub-domains are illustrated in Fig. 6. The non-over-
lapping Schwarz method with absorbing boundary conditions is considered, and the interface problem is
solved iteratively with the GMRES algorithm. The stopping criterion is krnk2 < 106kr0k2, where rn and r0 are
the nth and the initial global residuals, and where kÆk2 denotes the L2 -norm. All simulations were performed
on an SGI ORIGIN 2000 machine with eight CPUs. Each sub-domain is allocated to a different processor,
and data exchange between the processors are performed with the MPI library.
Table 1 presents the convergence results of the Schwarz algorithm for different frequencies and different
number of sub-domains for the simplified engine. This table clearly outlines the robustness of the non-over-
lapping Schwarz method with absorbing boundary conditions. The improvement of the Schwarz method is
clearly illustrated when using an optimized procedure (OO0) on the interface rather than an expansion pro-
cedure (TO0). It is important to point out that one iteration of TO0 involves exactly the same number of oper-
ations and exactly the same computational than one iteration of the OO0 method [22]. For this reason, the
CPU time is not indicated in Table 1.

6.2. Engine in free field conditions

Large applications in automotive acoustic simulations are concerned with cavity problem, like passenger
compartments [27,28] with upper frequencies higher than 200 Hz. On the part of the engine compartment

Fig. 6. Mesh and mesh partitioning into three sub-domains of the ellipsoidal convex envelope surrounding the simplified engine.

Table 1
Number of iterations for different frequencies and different number of sub-domains for the simplified engine
Frequency # Sub-domains Schwarz with TO0 Schwarz with OO0
# Iterations # Iterations
400 2 143 114
400 4 287 179
400 8 456 294
800 2 255 162
800 4 482 239
800 8 718 378
The order of the infinite element is equal to m = 3.
652 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

exterior acoustic radiation of engine and transmission up to 2.5 kHz are of interest. The simulation of the
acoustic radiation of an engine is necessary to predict the impact on the passenger compartment. For compar-
ison to vehicle testing it is more convenient to examine the acoustic radiation within free field boundary con-
ditions. In FEM analysis, a free field boundary condition can be taken into account by means of infinite
elements. For this purpose a single layer of infinite elements of variable order is matched onto an ellipsoidal
surface of a conventional finite element mesh. The interior boundary of the acoustic model is represented by
the surface of the engine. The acoustic excitation, caused by the engine vibrations is calculated in a separate
FE model by means of MSC/NASTRAN and is imported into the acoustic model as frequency dependant
boundary condition on the engine surface.
The ellipsoidal air volume surrounding the engine has been modelled by 250 000 FEM-elements and 30 000
IFEM-elements, and 54 000 nodes. Figs. 7 and 8 illustrate the geometry of the engine and the mesh partition-
ing of the ellipsoidal air volume into four sub-domains.
The non-overlapping Schwarz algorithm is considered for the solution of the acoustical radiation problem.
The GMRES algorithm is considered in the following analysis. As already discussed, the speed of the conver-
gence of the GMRES algorithm is linked with the maximum number of stored descent direction vectors. This
number is associated to a window of iterations. Within one window each descent direction vector used to
search the solution is kept in memory. Unfortunately, when the number of iterations becomes larger than
the maximum number of iteration vectors, the iteration method is restarted. Any restart induces a deteriora-
tion in the number of iterations needed to reach convergence since all iteration vectors from the preceding win-
dow are lost. To achieve fast convergence, the maximum number of iteration vectors should be chosen large
enough to perform all iterations within one window.
Table 2 presents the number of iterations for different frequencies and different number of sub-domains for
the engine in free field conditions. Once again, the non-overlapping Schwarz method with OO0 conditions
converges faster than with TO0 conditions. In Table 2, it can be noticed that increasing the frequency increases
the number of iterations. This property is due to the fact that at higher frequencies the acoustic solution
becomes more complex and therefore deteriorate the conditioning number of the linear system defined on
the interface. As already noticed for internal acoustic problems [27], increasing the number of sub-domains

Fig. 7. Surface mesh of the engine (courtesy of DaimlerChrysler).

 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 653

Fig. 8. Cross section of the free field boundary model. Mesh partitioning into four sub-domains obtained with METIS (courtesy of
DaimlerChrysler).

Table 2
Number of iterations for different frequencies and different number of sub-domains for the engine in free field conditions
Frequency # Sub-domains Schwarz with TO0 Schwarz with OO0
# Iterations CPU time (min) # Iterations CPU time (min)
1000 2 264 6 239 6
1000 4 529 5 377 3
1000 8 840 3 620 3
2000 2 442 8 356 7
2000 4 831 6 521 4
2000 8 1235 5 824 3
The order of the infinite element is equal to m = 3.

increases the number of iterations. Anyway, this does not implies additional CPU time, since the supplemen-
tary number of iteration is overcome by smaller sub-domains which are solved by a direct solution method.

7. Conclusion

In this paper, an infinite element method has been presented and analyzed for parallel computations pur-
pose. This method is interesting for solving acoustical radiation problems in unbounded domain. A finite ele-
ments domain decomposition method has then been reminded. It has been shown, that an original
formulation of this domain decomposition method with Lagrange multipliers defined on (semi-)infinite space
allows to extend this method to infinite elements. This technique has been implemented in an industrial
654 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655

acoustic software (SYSNOISE). The numerical performance of this software have been illustrated on two
problems in the field of the engine development process. Some enhancements of the current implementation
should be done with respect to the scalability upon the number of sub-domains and with the frequency
parameter.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge partial support by the European Commission under Grant ESPRIT-25009, and
are grateful to DaimlerChrysler and to LMS International, partners in this project, for providing the test cases
and equipment for running the numerical examples. The authors would like to acknowledge A. K} ongeter,
J.-P. Coyette, C. Meir and J.-L. Migeot for the useful discussions, comments and remarks.

References

[1] R.J. Astley, G.J. Macaulay, J.-P. Coyette, L. Cremers, Three-dimensional wave envelope elements of variable order for acoustic
radiation and scattering—Part I: Formulation in the frequency domain, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103 (1) (1998) 49–63.
[2] R.J. Astley, G.J. Macaulay, J.-P. Coyette, Mapped wave envelope elements for acoustical radiation and scattering, J. Sound Vib. 170
(1) (1994) 97–118.
[3] K. Gerdes, A review of infinite element methods for exterior helmholtz problems, J. Comput. Acoust. 8 (1) (2000).
[4] K.-J. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1996.
[5] P.G. Ciarlet, The Finite Element Method for Elliptic Problems, North Holland, 1979.
[6] T.J.R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method, Prentice-Hall International Inc., 1987.
[7] D. Burnett, A 3D acoustic infinite element based on a generalized multipole expansion, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96 (5) (1994) 2798–2816.
[8] R. Leis, Initial Boundary Value Problems in Mathematical Physics, Teubner, 1986.
[9] F. Ihlenburg, Finite Element Analysis of Acoustic Scattering, Springer, 1998.
[10] K. Gerdes, Solution of the 3D Laplace and Helmholtz Equation in Exterior Domains of Arbitrary Shape Using hp-Finite–Infinite
Elements, Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1996.
[11] F. Magoulès, J.-C. Autrique, Calcul parallèle et méthodes d’élements finis et infinis pour des problèmes de radiation acoustique,
Calculateurs Parallèles, Réseaux Systèmes Répartis, Hermès 13 (1) (2001) 11–34.
[12] C. Farhat, F.-X. Roux, Implicit parallel processing in structural mechanics, in: J. Tinsley Oden (Ed.), Computational Mechanics
Advances, vol. 2(1), North-Holland, 1994, pp. 1–124.
[13] P. Le Tallec, Domain decomposition methods in computational mechanics, in: J. Tinsley Oden (Ed.), Computational Mechanics
Advances, vol. 1(2), North-Holland, 1994, pp. 121–220.
[14] A. Quarteroni, A. Valli, Domain Decomposition Methods for Partial Differential Equations, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999.
[15] B. Smith, P. Bjorstad, W. Gropp, Domain Decomposition: Parallel Multilevel Methods for Elliptic Partial Differential Equations,
Cambridge University Press, 1996.
[16] A. Toselli, O.B. Widlund, Domain Decomposition Methods: Algorithms and Theory, Springer Series in Computational Mathematics,
vol. 34, 2004.
[17] F. Magoulès, Parallel algorithms for coercive elliptic problems, in: B.H.V. Topping (Ed.), Computational Mechanics Using High
Performance Computing, 2002, pp. 135–150 (Chapter 7).
[18] F. Magoulès, Parallel algorithms for time-harmonic hyperbolic problems, in: B.H.V. Topping (Ed.), Computational Mechanics Using
High Performance Computing, 2002, pp. 151–183 (Chapter 8).
[19] SYSNOISE Rev 5.4, A software tool for vibro-acoustic simulation, LMS International, Interleuvenlaan 70, 3001 Leuven, Belgium,
1999.
[20] Y. Saad, Iterative Methods for Linear Systems, PWS Publishing, Boston, 1996.
[21] M.J. Gander, F. Magoulès, F. Nataf, Optimized Schwarz methods without overlap for the Helmholtz equation, SIAM J. Sci.
Comput. 24 (1) (2002) 38–60.
[22] F. Magoulès, P. Ivànyi, B.H.V. Topping, Non-overlapping Schwarz methods with optimized transmission conditions for the
Helmholtz equation, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 193 (45–47) (2004) 4797–4818.
[23] J.-D. Benamou, B. Després, A domain decomposition method for the Helmholtz equation and related optimal control problems, J.
Comput. Phys. 136 (1997) 68–82.
[24] P.-L. Lions, On the Schwarz alternating method, III: A variant for nonoverlapping sub-domains, in: T. Chan, R. Glowinski, J.
Périaux, O. Widlund (Eds.), SIAM Philadelphia, PA, 1989.
[25] P. Chevalier, F. Nataf, Symmetrized method with optimized second-order conditions for the Helmholtz equation, Contemp. Math.
218 (1998) 400–407.
[26] M. Gander, L. Halpern, F. Nataf, Optimal convergence for overlapping and non-overlapping Schwarz waveform relaxation, in:
Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Domain Decomposition Methods, 1999, pp. 27–36.
[27] F. Magoulès, K. Meerbergen, J.-P. Coyette, Application of a domain decomposition method with Lagrange multipliers to acoustic
problems arising from the automotive industry, J. Comput. Acoust. 8 (3) (2000) 503–521.
 J.-C. Autrique, F. Magoulès / Applied Mathematical Modelling 30 (2006) 641–655 655

[28] F. Magoulès, F.-X. Roux, J.-P. Coyette, C. Lecomte, Numerical treatment of internal acoustic problems by substructuring methods,
in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Computational Methods in Engineering, Ghent, Belgium, 1998.
[29] G. Karypis, V. Kumar, METIS—unstructured graph partitioning and sparse matrix ordering system—version 2.0. Technical report,
University of Minnesota, Dept. Computer Science, Minneapolis, MN 55455, 1995.
[30] G. Karypis, V. Kumar, METIS: a software package for partitioning unstructured graphs, partitioning meshes, and computing fill-
reducing orderings of sparse matrices, 1997. Available from: <http://www.cs.umn.edu/~karypis>.