[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>>>> One or more new changesets pushed to the primary dolfin repository.
>>>>>>>> A short summary of the last three changesets is included below.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> changeset:   4730:6548c25c33352492c9279c035509a139caab323b
>>>>>>>> tag:         tip
>>>>>>>> user:        "Garth N. Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
>>>>>>>> date:        Tue Sep 09 13:08:58 2008 +0100
>>>>>>>> files:       dolfin/fem/Assembler.cpp dolfin/pde/LinearPDE.cpp
>>>>>>>> description:
>>>>>>>> Revert to old assembly in LinearPDE due to bug in symmetric
>>>>>>>> assembly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a problem with exterior facets in the symmetric assembly.
>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>> code needs to be broken up to make debugging easier.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Agree that it should be broken up. But it will take some effort.
>>>>>>> Do you have an example where the bug is apparent ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was using a RT0 element (not one of the demos).  It should be
>>>>>> reproducible by adding a non-zero Dirichlet bc (given be a Function)
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> the mixed-poisson demo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had a quick look, but I couldn't find the problem, so I thought it
>>>>>> better to wait until the code is broken up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Garth
>>>>>>
>>>>> Strange, I see no reason for this not to work.
>>>>> (since the code involving only cell integrals is pretty clean, but
>>>>> ...)
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I noticed that with my setup, CG is used. CG can not be used
>>>>> in this case since the problem is not positive. Did you use CG ?
>>>> No, I used an LU solver. I first noticed the problem when the LU
>>>> solvers
>>>> return a message that the system was singular. I only looked at the
>>>> computation of the RHS vector which was zero when it  shouldn't have
>>>> been.
>>> Ok, and I guess the system is singular unless you have a mix of
>>> essential
>>> and natural
>>> bc.  But the rhs should not be zero.
>>>
>> The essential bcs appear in the form for this problem, so the assembler
>> shouldn't be doing anything extra for the bcs (bcs.size() = 0 in
>> Asssembler.cpp). Makes the bug rather strange.
>>
>> Garth
>>
> 
> So the essential bc that you refer to is the essential bc for the
> classical Poisson problem
> which ends up as natural in the mixed formulation. So you have something
> like:
> 
> L = w*f*dx + w*g*ds
>

Exactly.

Garth

> I'll have a look.
> 
> (But as already said, I completely agree on breaking up)
> 
> Kent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
DOLFIN-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev

Reply via email to