Why should they for the heat equation? The boundary values for the update is zero, and the boundary values for the solution is always a given value (for constant boundary conditions).
Am Mittwoch, 18. Oktober 2017 18:16:26 UTC+2 schrieb Jean-Paul Pelteret: > > boundary_constraints.distribute(distributed_solution); > boundary_constraints.distribute(distributed_old_solution); > > This looks suspicious to me. Don't the Dirichlet constraints change > between time-steps? > > > > On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:16:08 PM UTC+2, Maxi Miller wrote: >> >> Removing the mesh-changing function does not change the result of the >> code, it just makes the result more coarse. >> >> Am Mittwoch, 18. Oktober 2017 15:42:26 UTC+2 schrieb Bruno Turcksin: >>> >>> >>> 2017-10-18 8:54 GMT-04:00 'Maxi Miller' via deal.II User Group < >>> [email protected]>: >>> >>>> I assume that my old values are correct, after I get a reasonable >>>> result with them. >>>> >>> It doesn't mean it's right though. It maybe be slightly wrong and then, >>> the error could be amplified when you are using these values to compute the >>> gradients. >>> >>>> >>>> and when checking the data before and after the mesh change, they look >>>> similar (not equal due to changed refinements). How should I else check >>>> those values? >>>> >>> Have you checked that your code works like it should if you don't change >>> the mesh? If it does, you should be able to check your data using first >>> order elements for a few cells. This way you can check that everything >>> works like you expect. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Bruno >>> >> -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum options, see https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
