Hi, Wolfgang
>>I found one problem with inp file - in line "1 0 quad1 2 3 4". I
>> guess the second number should be nonzero here. I have try to set 1 and
>> get better results. Now I can see velocity changes around the
>> input-output bounds.
> Is this an input file you created yours
Hello all,
While using a new kind of shape function, degrees of freedom on each cell
will couple to the degrees of freedom on other cells connected to the
current one by a common face or common vertex.
>From the description of make_flux_sparsity_pattern(), it can solve the
problem when two ele
Hello,
While implementing a new kind shape function which has non-zero shape value
between a quadrature point and an adjacent element's node, I found I
couldn't find a way to make a SparsityPattern.
Could somebody give some suggestions how to build SparsityPattern?
The attach file is a picture
Hi colleagues,
When testing my codes with FENedelec and FENedelecSZ elements, I saw that
the shape functions change versus the mesh size.
I think that for each edge of a cell, the shape functions for the degree of
freedom related to that edge are scaled with the inverse edge length.
For example,
Hi,
I'm trying to solve a time dependent advection-diffusion equation with
periodic boundary conditions. Just a simple du/dt = D \nabla^2 u - v \dot
\grad u for now. I use a large diffusion constant, so stability shouldn't
be an issue. The solution behaves normally in the bulk, but some of the
On 3/19/19 9:57 AM, David F wrote:
>
> I am not sure how to answer your question. I'm using a very basic a setup
> equivalent to step-8. Therefore, I have a solution vector with final
> displacements where each entry corresponds to the displacement of a dof. My
> aim is to find the initial posi
Dear prof. Bangerth,
I am not sure how to answer your question. I'm using a very basic a setup
equivalent to step-8. Therefore, I have a solution vector with final
displacements where each entry corresponds to the displacement of a dof. My
aim is to find the initial position of the vertices in
On 3/19/19 9:12 AM, David F wrote:
>
> I want to obtain the final position of the vertices (specifically, the
> vertices at the faces), i.e., the deformed configuration. I think that a way
> of doing this is by creating a set of points and using fe_values to
> extrapolate the solution to those
Hi all,
I want to obtain the final position of the vertices (specifically, the
vertices at the faces), i.e., the deformed configuration. I think that a
way of doing this is by creating a set of points and using fe_values to
extrapolate the solution to those points. However, I don't like the ide
On 2/12/19 12:40 AM, chucui1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Constraints are funny and sometimes require deep thought about what exactly
> > they mean. What happens if you don't apply constraints to the
> > cell_volume_matrix and cell_gradient_matrix -- i.e., you copy the elements
> 1:1
> > into th
On 2/12/19 6:15 PM, SebG wrote:
>
> sorry about not getting back to this for while. I have addressed your second
> point and created an example that is much easier to understand. Now the
> geometry is the unit cube. The vector field is A = [0 , 0 , y] and then
> curl(A) = [1 , 0 , 0].
>
> I ha
On 2/27/19 2:40 AM, chucui1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I have used SolutionTransfer as you say, but if I set a phi_0 fixed, then
> project it into finite element space and get a vector phi_0_h, then I get
> phi_0_h/2, phi_0_h/4, phi_0_h/8 by using SolutionTransfer, but the norm
> of (phi_0_h- phi_
> I think that with the H curl conforming element like FeNedelec or
> FeNedelecSZ,
> my solution vector has continuous tangential component, isn't it?
Yes.
> Thus, Is there some where I can see my vector solution is discontinuous? Can
> I
> check it by visualization?
Yes, you can do that,
On 3/18/19 4:30 PM, jane@jandj-ltd.com wrote:
>
> To impose strongly - would you just
> useVectorTools::compute_nonzero_tangential_flux_constraints with the
> ZeroFunction?
> or is there a function similar to compute_no_normal_flux_constraints?
Yes, this will compute the constraints that co
On 3/19/19 4:17 AM, luca.heltai wrote:
> what would you think of a function in GridTools like
>
> GridTools::propagate_internal_manifold_ids(tria, disambiguation_function)
>
> that would loop over all cells, loop over all faces, check if the neighbor
> manifold id is the same of this cell, and
>
Thanks Jean-Paul, I set n_components to dim and it ran.
However, no difference whatsoever in the solution to when I was
equivalently imposing in the weak form (where the tangential term
disappears due to being zero), so I do continue to wonder whether the two
are equivalent. Thank you
On Tues
Dear Jane,
> const Functions::ZeroFunction no_tang_bcs;
This should be const Functions::ZeroFunction no_tang_bcs(n_components);
Best,
Jean-Paul
--
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
---
Y
In addition to above, I thought I'd try VectorTools::compute_
nonzero_tangential_flux_constraints:
I did:
std::set no_tang_flux_boundaries;
no_tang_flux_boundaries.insert(1);
const Functions::ZeroFunction no_tang_bcs;
typename FunctionMap::type no_tang_map;
no_tang_map[1] = &no_tang_bcs;
VectorToo
Nicola,
what would you think of a function in GridTools like
GridTools::propagate_internal_manifold_ids(tria, disambiguation_function)
that would loop over all cells, loop over all faces, check if the neighbor
manifold id is the same of this cell, and
i) the two ids are the same: assign the
Will take a look at it, thanks!
Am Dienstag, 19. März 2019 10:59:32 UTC+1 schrieb Luca Heltai:
>
> > Is there a reason then that there are several examples using
> integration_loop(), but (afaik) only one using mesh_loop?
>
> Yes. mesh_loop is more recent w.r.t. integration_loop.
>
> mesh_loop
> Is there a reason then that there are several examples using
> integration_loop(), but (afaik) only one using mesh_loop?
Yes. mesh_loop is more recent w.r.t. integration_loop.
mesh_loop was introduced to address some of the oddities that are in
integration_loop, that make its use somewhat les
Is there a reason then that there are several examples using
integration_loop(), but (afaik) only one using mesh_loop?
Am Montag, 18. März 2019 19:46:41 UTC+1 schrieb Luca Heltai:
>
> Take a look at this PR for a few examples of usage of mesh_loop:
>
> https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/7806
22 matches
Mail list logo
