> I know that there's no need to solve advection problem like that. Actually > I'm going to add some more complicated terms to the advection term and see > if it works well. That's why I'm about to verify that in the simplest way > and then generalize that to 2D and 3D.
I think it'd be simpler to start in 2d. Solving 1d problems with DG is significantly different from anything else you would ever do in deal.II. It would be difficult to re-use some parts of the code for 2d/3d later on. Best W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: [email protected] www: http://www.math.tamu.edu/~bangerth/ _______________________________________________ dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii
