Muhammad,
> Hi! I am successful in running the code and it > is without a doubt a nice addition to deal.ii code gallery. It reproduces the > expected result for 3d Beam case now. Great. Can you say what you had to change to make things run? We should apply these changes to the version that is available on the web so that others don't have to figure this out like you had. > Since I did not find any thermomechanical coupled example so far in deal.ii > therefore I want to contribute in the development and widening the scope of > this code by coupling it with heat equation of step-26. > For this purpose , taking your lectures as a reference, Initially for testing > purpose (i.e. before importing temperature solution from step-26) , I have > added the thermal load in the /*cell_rhs*/ as following: > [...] > In the result the displacement result is qualitatively as per the expectation > i.e. the plate is expanding from other three ends but the System residuals in > Newton iterations are of the order of 1e+4 or even more. > I do not have much experience in under concentration mathematical approach or > I might be mistaking in writing the code for thermal loading force term as > per > deal.ii standards (because the /*rhs_values_body_force */term already present > in code is even bigger in numerical quantity than the thermal loading term > which is added by me but still it lets system converge for small residuals of > 1e-5 during solution) therefore I would be grateful to you for any guiding > response in my this course of development. Thank you! I'm not quite sure what your question is, but for sure step-26 is not using any physical units, so the solution there is not usable to define what the right order of magnitude is. In general, 1e+4 is not in itself a large number. You need to say what your units are, and compare that with the typical size of what you are considering. For example, if you consider the deformation of a bridge as you drive a truck over it, and you choose to express the deformation in micrometers, then 1e4 is not a large number. On the other hand, if you express the deformation in lightyears, then 1e4 *is* a large number. So the question you need to ask yourself is whether the residual is large *compared to what you would expect*. Best W. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wolfgang Bangerth email: [email protected] www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/ -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/42b31a35-a395-62a4-76cf-131bb90f86fd%40colostate.edu.
