Thank you!
It is good to know that the idea is to use FESystem, FEInterfaceVAlues
and FEValuesExtractor together. I did not know this.

However, our application is particular in that we actually do evaluate
all the components to our FESystem at each interface.

At the moment I do not have time to dig out my old code. But I will
check if I can still reproduce my claim that FEInterfaceValues returns
zeros without throwing an assertion if used in conjunction with FESystem
later this year and, in case it does, open issue.

I am sorry that I cannot do it now.

Best,
Nils

Timo Heister <[email protected]> writes:

> If you use an FESystem, you typically don't need the evaluation done over all 
> components. Instead, use an FEValuesExtractor and you should have
> everything available:
> https://www.dealii.org/current/doxygen/deal.II/classFEInterfaceViews_1_1Vector.html
> I'd anything is wrong or missing, please open an issue.
>
> -- https://www.math.clemson.edu/~heister/
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 15:33 Praveen C <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  Hello Wolfgang
>
>  FEFaceValues has two types of functions
>
>   void   get_function_values (const InputVector &fe_function, std::vector< 
> typename InputVector::value_type > &values) const  
>       
>      void   get_function_values (const InputVector &fe_function, std::vector< 
> Vector< typename InputVector::value_type > >    
>        &values) const    
>
>  But FEInterfaceValues only has the first one, which is for scalar FE.
>
>   void   get_jump_in_function_values (const InputVector &fe_function, 
> std::vector< typename InputVector::value_type > &values) const  
>
>  It looks like vector FE case is not implemented fully.
>
>  best
>  praveen
>
>  On 25 Apr 2024, at 5:25 PM, Wolfgang Bangerth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  On 4/25/24 01:21, Nils Schween wrote:
>
>  I think FEInterfaceValues is not implemented for FESystem. In my case, it 
> actually
>  just returned zeros without throwing an assertion. It is however more
>  than two years ago I experimented with it.
>
>  That would be a bug. We'd love to have a small test case that illustrates 
> this.
>
>  -- 
>  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/5B683112-4703-46C9-A54D-928A60143A19%40gmail.com.

-- 
Nils Schween
PhD Student

Phone: +49 6221 516 557
Mail: [email protected]
PGP-Key: 4DD3DCC0532EE96DB0C1F8B5368DBFA14CB81849

Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics
Astrophysical Plasma Theory (APT)
Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg
https://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/mpi/en/research/scientific-divisions-and-groups/independent-research-groups/apt

-- 
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/87mspglgvj.fsf%40mpi-hd.mpg.de.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to