Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter January 29, 2018

Preconditioning methods for eddy-current optimally controlled time-harmonic electromagnetic problems

  • Owe Axelsson and Dalibor Lukáš EMAIL logo


Time-harmonic problems arise in many important applications, such as eddy current optimally controlled electromagnetic problems. Eddy current modelling can also be used in non-destructive testings of conducting materials. Using a truncated Fourier series to approximate the solution, for linear problems the equation for different frequencies separate, so it suffices to study solution methods for the problem for a single frequency.

The arising discretized system takes a two-by-two or four-by-four block matrix form. Since the problems are in general three-dimensional in space and hence of very large scale, one must use an iterative solution method. It is then crucial to construct efficient preconditioners.

It is shown that an earlier used preconditioner for optimal control problems is applicable here also and leads to very tight eigenvalue bounds and hence very fast convergence such as for a Krylov subspace iterative solution method. A comparison is done with an earlier used block diagonal preconditioner.

JEL Classification: 35K20; 65F08; 65M60


The authors gratefully acknowledge a comment by professor Yuri Kuznetsov which improved the presentation of this paper. We also acknowledge helpful comments by two reviewers.

  1. Funding The first author was supported by The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports from the National Programme of Sustainability (NPU II) project “IT4Innovations of excellence in science – LQ1602”. The second author was supported by the Czech Science Foundation under the project 17-22615S. In this work we used the IT4Innovations infrastructure which is supported by The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports from the Large Infrastructures for Research, Experimental Development and Innovations project “IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center – LM2015070”.


[1] D. N. Arnold, R. S. Falk, and R. Winther, Multigrid in H(div) and H(curl). Numer. Math. 85 (2000), 197–217.10.1007/PL00005386Search in Google Scholar

[2] L. Arnold and B. Harrach. A unified variational formulation for the parabolic-elliptic eddy current equations. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 72 (2012), 558–576.10.1137/110831477Search in Google Scholar

[3] O. Axelsson and W. Layton. A two-level method for the discretization of nonlinear boundary value problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 33 (1996), 2359–2374.10.1137/S0036142993247104Search in Google Scholar

[4] O. Axelsson, S. Farouq, and M. Neytcheva, Comparison of preconditioned Krylov subspace iteration methods for PDE-constrained optimization problems. Poisson and convection–diffusion control. Numerical Algorithms, 73 (2016), 631–663.10.1007/s11075-016-0111-1Search in Google Scholar

[5] O. Axelsson, S. Farouq, and M. Neytcheva. Comparison of preconditioned Krylov subspace iteration methods for PDE-constrained optimization problems. Stokes control. Numerical Algorithms, 74 (2017), 19–37.10.1007/s11075-016-0136-5Search in Google Scholar

[6] O. Axelsson, S. Farouq, and M. Neytcheva. A preconditioner for optimal control problems constrained by Stokes equation with a time-harmonic control. J. Comp. Appl. Math. 310 (2017), 5–18.10.1016/ in Google Scholar

[7] O. Axelsson and D. Lukáš, Preconditioners for time-harmonic optimal control eddy-current problems. In: Large-Scale Scientific Computing (Eds. I. Lirkov and S. Margenov), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10665. Springer, Cham, 2018, pp. 47–54.Search in Google Scholar

[8] O. Axelsson and A. Kucherov, Real valued iterative methods for solving complex symmetric linear systems. Numer. Linear Algebra Appl. 7 (2000), 197–218.10.1002/1099-1506(200005)7:4<197::AID-NLA194>3.0.CO;2-SSearch in Google Scholar

[9] O. Axelsson, M. Neytcheva, and B. Ahmad, A comparison of iterative methods to solve complex valued linear algebraic systems. Numerical Algorithms, 66 (2014), 811–841.10.1007/s11075-013-9764-1Search in Google Scholar

[10] F. Bachinger, U. Langer, and J. Schöberl, Efficient solvers for nonlinear time-periodic eddy current problems. Comput. Vis. Sci. 9 (2006), 197–207.10.1007/s00791-006-0023-zSearch in Google Scholar

[11] R. Hiptmair, Multigrid method for Maxwell’s equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 36 (1998), 204–225.10.1137/S0036142997326203Search in Google Scholar

[12] N. Ida, Numerical Modeling for Electromagnetic Non-destructive Evaluation. Engineering NDE. Chapman & Halls, London, 1995.10.1007/978-1-4757-0560-7Search in Google Scholar

[13] T. V. Kolev and P. S. Vassilevski, Parallel auxiliary space AMG solver for H(curl) problems. J. Comput. Math. 27 (2009), 604–623.10.4208/jcm.2009.27.5.013Search in Google Scholar

[14] M. Kollmann and M. Kolmbauer, A preconditioned MinRes solver for time-periodic parabolic optimal control problems. Numer. Linear Algebra Appl. 20 (2013), 761–784.10.1002/nla.1842Search in Google Scholar

[15] M. Kolmbauer and U. Langer, A robust preconditioned MINRES solver for distributed time-periodic eddy current optimal control problems. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 34 (2012), B785–B809.10.1137/110842533Search in Google Scholar

[16] M. Kolmbauer, The Multiharmonic Finite Element and Boundary Element Method for Simulation and Control of Eddy Current Problems. Ph.D. thesis, Johannes Kepler Universität, Linz, Austria, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[17] J. C. Nédélec, Mixed finite elements in ℝ3. Numer. Math. 35 (1980), 315–341.10.1007/BF01396415Search in Google Scholar

[18] J. C. Nédélec, A new family of mixed finite elements in ℝ3. Numer. Math. 50 (1986), 57–81.10.1007/BF01389668Search in Google Scholar

[19] Y. Notay, An aggregation-based algebraic multigrid method. Electron. Trans. Numer. Anal. 37 (2010), 123–146.Search in Google Scholar

[20] C. C. Paige and M. A. Saunders, Solution of sparse indefinite systems of linear equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 12 (1975), 617–629.10.1137/0712047Search in Google Scholar

[21] Y. Saad, A flexible inner-outer preconditioned GMRES algorithm. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 14 (1993), 461–469.10.1137/0914028Search in Google Scholar

[22] F. Tröltzsch, Optimal control of partial differential equations: theory, methods and applications. Grad. Stud. Math. Vol. 112, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010.10.1090/gsm/112/07Search in Google Scholar

[23] P. S. Vassilevski, Multilevel Block Factorization Preconditioners. Matrix-based Analysis and Algorithms for Solving Finite Element Equations. Springer, New York, 2008.Search in Google Scholar

[24] S. Yamada and K. Bessho, Harmonic field calculation by the combination of finite element analysis and harmonic balance method. IEEE Trans. Magnetics, 24 (1988), 2588–2590.10.1109/20.92182Search in Google Scholar

[25] I. Yousept, Optimal control of Maxwell’s equations with regularized state constraints. Comput. Optim. Appl. 52 (2012), 559–581.10.1007/s10589-011-9422-2Search in Google Scholar

[26] I. Yousept, Optimal control of quasilinear H(curl)-elliptic partial differential equations in magnetostatic field problems. SIAM J. Control Optim. 51 (2013), 3624–3651.10.1137/120904299Search in Google Scholar

[27] I. Yousept, Optimal control of non-smooth hyperbolic evolution Maxwell equations in type-II superconductivity. SIAM J. Control Optim. 55 (2017), 2305–2332.10.1137/16M1074229Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2017-04-28
Revised: 2017-12-01
Accepted: 2017-12-06
Published Online: 2018-01-29
Published in Print: 2019-03-26

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 2.6.2023 from
Scroll to top button