[deal.II] Re: online deal.II workshop: Friday, June 18

Hi Timo, short question: will the workshop afterwards be available on YouTube analogous to the last workshop? Regards, David On Wednesday, 2 June 2021 at 17:36:08 UTC+2 Timo Heister wrote: > Hi all, > > We would like to announce a one-day deal.II workshop on June 18, 2021 > with several talks

Re: [deal.II] Unique FE evaluation on arbitrary points

ts and recv_components. I > am happy to write a draft if you want. > > Hope this helps, > Peter > On 12.05.21 09:08, 'David' via deal.II User Group wrote: > > Dear all, > > I'm currently looking for a way to evaluate my global solution on an > arbitrary cloud of point

[deal.II] Unique FE evaluation on arbitrary points

Dear all, I'm currently looking for a way to evaluate my global solution on an arbitrary cloud of points and stumbled across the (new) class `Utilities::MPI::RemotePointEvaluation`. In general, the class does exactly what I want with one particular exception; I want to evaluate each point

Re: [deal.II] Visualizing higher-order cells in 3D (step-67)

), it looks as follows: >> >> [image: coarse_mesh_four_subd.png] >> >> >> Does it help? >> Regards, >> David >> >> Wolfgang Bangerth schrieb am Montag, 22. Februar 2021 um 20:10:05 UTC+1: >> >>> On 2/18/21 6:39 AM, 'David' via d

Re: [deal.II] Visualizing higher-order cells in 3D (step-67)

surface: >>> [image: close-up.png] >>> >>> >>> Running the same case in serial looks as follows. >>> [image: serial.png] >>> >>> The surface is smooth as usual. I would expect the visualization of the >>> serial and the paral

Re: [deal.II] Understanding loops in matrix-free

gt;> to investigate rapidly. >> >> One thing you could do is to look into the "face_range" that you obtain >> when the algorithm calls back into local_apply_boundary_face and compare >> that with the range that you manually construct in your first version? I &g

Re: [deal.II] Understanding loops in matrix-free

> wonder if there are some parts of the loop we are missing or running twice. > > Best, > Martin > On 06.02.21 19:18, 'David' via deal.II User Group wrote: > > > Sorry for messing up the topic. I should be Understanding loops in > matrix-free. I wanted to insert a

[deal.II] Understanding loops in matrix-free

Sorry for messing up the topic. I should be Understanding loops in matrix-free. I wanted to insert a figure of the source code rather than the google groups formatting and it didn't work for some reason. David schrieb am Samstag, 6. Februar 2021 um 19:15:07 UTC+1: > Hi there, > > I'm currently

[deal.II] Understanding

Hi there, I'm currently trying to pack my cell operations into one of the matrix-free loop functions. In my first version, I implemented the loops manually by using (sorry for the odd formatting): ``` local_apply_cell(*matrix_free, system_rhs,

Re: [deal.II] Re: Modifying shape function data in MatrixFree

placement at one vertex differs by minuscule > amount? Probably not. But even a small shift in the solution changes > "where" the error in the residual resides, and your comparison is measuring > that. > > Best, > Jean-Paul > > > On 31.12.20 1

Re: [deal.II] Re: Modifying shape function data in MatrixFree

ressions of the residual associated with displacement DoFs. The > linearisation can be similarly computed for one parameterisation and > transformed into the others. Its a nice exercise to go though, if you have > the time and patience to do so. > > Best, > Jean-Paul > > > On

Re: [deal.II] Re: Modifying shape function data in MatrixFree

ystem_to_base_index(j).first.first; > const Tensor<2,dim> dF_J = fe_values_ref[this->u_fe].gradient(j, q_point); > > if ((i_group == j_group) && (i_group == this->u_dof)) > { > cell_matrix(i, j) += scalar_product(dF_I, HH, dF_J) * JxW; } ... // See > the rest of

[deal.II] Re: Modifying shape function data in MatrixFree

Maybe as an edit: what I currently do looks the following way: ``` // Get gradient in reference frame const Tensor<2, dim, VectorizedArrayType> grad_u = phi.get_gradient(q_point ); // Compute deformation gradient const Tensor<2, dim, VectorizedArrayType> F = Physics::Elasticity::

[deal.II] Modifying shape function data in MatrixFree

Hi all, I'm currently trying to implement a vectorized variant of the residual assembly as it is done in step-44/one of the corresponding code-gallery examples using FEEvaluation objects in combination with matrix-free. I was not able to find an appropriate solution for the given code line

[deal.II] Re: Solver for nonlinear solid dynamics

Dear Wolfgang and Richard, thanks a lot for your quick replies! Have you taken a look at the deal.II Code Gallery? >https://dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/CodeGallery.html > There are a couple more large-deformation codes. > > Looked once, but obviously not close enough. There are

[deal.II] Solver for nonlinear solid dynamics

Hello everyone, we (the preCICE team ) are targeting to support a new deal.II solver for preCICE. We want to simulate the probably well known Turek