ng a face
> but only to join them. Hence, whatever input you provide to
> Triangulation::create_triangulation() must have these faces already. GridIn
> should work for that if the faces are disjoint in the input file.
>
> Best,
> Daniel
>
> Am Di., 13. Okt. 2020 um 11:20
aster/cookbooks/prescribed_velocity/prescribed_velocity.cc#L297-L303
> As you can see, you need to know which dof you need to constrain
>
> Best,
>
> Bruno
>
> Le mar. 13 oct. 2020 à 11:02, 孙翔 a écrit :
> >
> >
> > Hi, Bruno,
> >
> > Thank you very much. Does th
Hi, Daniel,
Thank you very much. So, if I want to disjoint the faces, how should I do
using dealII or I need to disjoint them manually? If I manually disjoint
them, should I duplicate the joint nodes and assign them with the new
number, then assemble the adjacent element with the duplicated
Hi, Daniel,
Thank you very much. So, if I want to disjoint the faces, how should I do
using dealII or I need to disjoint them manually? If I manually disjoint
them, should I duplicate the joint nodes and assign them with the new
number, then assemble the adjacent element with the duplicated
Hi, Bruno,
Thank you very much. Does the AffineConstraint force the value at the
specified DOF? I need to how the node numbers map to the DOF, right?
Best,
Xiang
On Monday, 12 October 2020 at 06:21:03 UTC-7 bruno.t...@gmail.com wrote:
> Xiang,
>
> You cannot apply a boundary condition on an
Hi, I want to model injecting heat fluid into a tiny fracture which is
inside a block. The fracture is modeled as an interface which is an
internal face shared by two hex elements. Is it possible for us to apply
the Dirichlet boundary condition on the interface? If not, how should I do
it?
Hi, Wolfgang,
Oh, I see. Thank you very much.
Best,
Xiang
On Friday, 7 August 2020 11:12:18 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/7/20 12:05 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> > Hi, Wolfgang,
> >
> > Thank you very much. Please see the following error message (red parts)
> w
Hi, Wolfgang,
Thank you very much. Please see the following error message (red parts)
which is all I get from the Github version.
Scanning dependencies of target thm
[ 20%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/thm.dir/src/main.cc.o
In file included from /home/shyaan/thm/src/main.cc:8:0:
/thm_seg_distributed
Best,
Xiang
On Wednesday, 5 August 2020 16:23:07 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/5/20 10:42 AM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > Please see the attached file, which is the head file that used the
> library.
> > Thank you very much.
>
> That's
Hi, Wolfgang,
Please see the attached file, which is the head file that used the library.
Thank you very much.
Best,
Xiang
On Wednesday, 5 August 2020 09:14:51 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/5/20 10:13 AM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > I have included it actually, and al
3:00 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/5/20 3:01 AM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > error: cannot declare field ‘CoupledTH<3>::triangulation’ to be of
> abstract
> > type ‘dealii::parallel::distributed::Triangulation<3, 3>’
>
> I susp
Hi, I want to declare a variable triangulation as the
type dealii::parallel::distributed::Triangulation<3, 3>. The code is :
in main function,
using namespace dealii;
Utilities::MPI::MPI_InitFinalize mpi_initialization(argc, argv, 1);
CoupledTH<3> coupled_TH_solver(1);
Got it. Thanks a lot.
On Monday, 3 August 2020 06:10:40 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/2/20 11:26 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it cannot run on a cluster. Both of them run in release mode. I'm
> also
> > curious about the error. I debug the code by outputt
Hi, Wolfgang,
Yes, it cannot run on a cluster. Both of them run in release mode. I'm also
curious about the error. I debug the code by outputting some specific
values.
Best,
Xiang
On Sunday, 2 August 2020 20:45:18 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 8/2/20 1:50 AM, 孙翔 wrote:
>
Hi, I run my parallelized code which is similar to step-18 on HPC. When I
run it in multiple mpi processes on a single node. It can give me a good
solution. However, when I run it on multiple nodes of HPC and each node has
one mpi process, it reported an error as follows. I checked the l2 norm
robably
> want to consider using pointers (or a std::reference) if you go this
> (preferred) route. Its easiest to collect them up as a std::pair, since
> they are logically bound to one another.
>
> I hope that this helps, either as a real solution to the problem or by
> giv
hat should work.
>
> Best,
> Daniel
>
> Am Mi., 29. Juli 2020 um 12:59 Uhr schrieb Wolfgang Bangerth <
> bang...@colostate.edu >:
>
>> On 7/28/20 12:11 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
>> > Hi, I followed step-17 and build a system matrix of which type
>> > is PETScWra
Thank you very much.
On Wednesday, 29 July 2020 09:59:43 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 7/28/20 12:11 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> > Hi, I followed step-17 and build a system matrix of which type
> > is PETScWrappers::MPI::SparseMatrix. I want to output it after
> assembling.
Hi, all,
I followed step-18 and wrote an HPC code in which I used a set of DOFs to
output two variables T and P. I debugged the coed and the code runs well.
However, it only outputs one variable, for the other variable, it only
outputs the number of processors not the value of the variable.
Hi, I followed step-17 and build a system matrix of which type
is PETScWrappers::MPI::SparseMatrix. I want to output it after assembling.
How should I do it? Thank you very much.
Best,
Xiang
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
Hi, Wolfgang,
Thank you very much.
Best,
Xiang
On Friday, 8 May 2020 06:03:04 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 5/7/20 10:25 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> > I have a .txt file which stores a permeability distribution in the
> z-direction
> > as follows
> >
> &g
Hi, I am using Dealii to do FE analysis. I have a .txt file which stores a
permeability distribution in the z-direction as follows
z value
0 0.1
1 0.3
2 0.5
3 0.2
4 0.8
5 0.4
6
Dear Wolfgang,
Thank you very much. I will try to see what happened by myself.
Best,
Xiang
On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 10:46:04 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 4/8/20 10:20 AM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > I tried the zero boundary and it can get a correct an
On Tuesday, 7 April 2020 16:03:10 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 4/7/20 4:58 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > Do you mean the Dirichlet boundary condition? I applied the boundary
> condition
> > after I form the right-hand side vector. I don't think the boundary
which is 1, but the
second method can not. The attached file is the solution.
Best,
Xiang
On Tuesday, 7 April 2020 16:03:10 UTC-7, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On 4/7/20 4:58 PM, 孙翔 wrote:
> >
> > Do you mean the Dirichlet boundary condition? I applied the boundary
> c
Hi, Jean-Paul,
Do you mean the Dirichlet boundary condition? I applied the boundary
condition after I form the right-hand side vector. I don't think the
boundary condition will lead to different solutions because the right-hand
side vector has been different before I add the boundary
Hi, Wolfgang,
I am still unclear about what is happening. That zero is just a typo. Even
if I remove the zero, these two methods can not get the same solution. What
I did is just using two methods to calculate the right-hand side generated
by time discretization. One way is to form a mass
27 matches
Mail list logo
