Dear Wolfgang,
I have made a silly mistake. Thank you for pointing out this mistake! The shape functions indeed look fine! I apologize for wasting time your time like that … Best wishes, John On Friday, April 23, 2021 at 1:21:42 AM UTC+2 Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > > For the second question: You are absolutely right. I do expect two edge > > elements of different degree to be different. > > Right, but that does not mean that every shape function of FE_Nedelec(1) > must > be different from all of the FE_Nedelec(0) shape functions. Some of them > may > in fact be the same. (c.f. the example of FE_QHierarchical.) > > I ran your program, and the shape functions for FE_Nedelec(0) look correct > to > me, but there are two small mistakes you are making: > (i) in the figure you show in the other email, your assumptions about > the order of edges is not correct. It should be this: > > *--3--* > | | > 0 1 > | | > *--2--* > > (ii) in your little test code, you have these lines where you (try to) > reset > the solution vector: > > for (unsigned int i; i < solution.size(); ++i) > solution(i) = 0; > > In this loop, you forget to initialize 'i' to zero at the beginning of > the loop. If you do, you get the expected results and you will also > see how this will work for the FE_Nedelec(1). > > Best > Wolfgang > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Wolfgang Bangerth email: bang...@colostate.edu > 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 dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/09182bf2-1d1a-4f34-891c-053bf279ed96n%40googlegroups.com.
