Hi Daniel,
I did indeed have this in.
I seem to have fixed it when I rewrote everything from scratch... seems
sometimes it is quicker to start from the beginning.
Thanks to all that helped - I have learned a great deal from this post
alone and I hope I can contribute as much.
On Saturday,
Jane,
> For more info, the VectorTools flux conditions are in my setup_dofs code,
> within costraints.clear()... constraints.close(). After assembling the
> system, I don't use the distribute local to global function but I instead
> distribute the constraints onto the solution after I have
k great - good to know that I am implementing it correctly.
I'm not sure - I didn't think it would have mattered, but something seems
to be going when you also have a Dirichlet condition application (My code
works fine with Dirichlet all around the boundary).
The values I am using are
I've further run some tests with Dirichlet all around the boundary. I get a
smooth p solution but a similar jump to the previous attachment but ONLY in
the x component of u
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 3:48:12 AM UTC+1, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
>
> > With what you are saying with the
Also, as additional comments (having run some more tests),
The Dirichlet condition application is fine - I get the correct solutions
and convergence rates when Dirichlet conditions are defined on the entire
boundary.
When u.n = u_known.n is applied everywhere, this doesn't give the correct
Ok great - good to know that I am implementing it correctly.
I'm not sure - I didn't think it would have mattered, but something seems
to be going wrong with the Dirichlet condition application (when I remove
that snippet of code, the solution is at least smooth).
The values I am using are
With what you are saying with the normal vector, having looked at the
documentation, I'm unsure as to why I need to know this? It says that "i.e.
the normal components of the solution u and a given f shall coincide. The
function f is given by |boundary_function| " so I have fed in the
Will do, thanks!
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Wolfgang Bangerth
wrote:
> On 08/31/2018 06:06 PM, mrjonmatth...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I've been trying to use VectorTools::project_boundary_values_div_conforming
>> in a similar model to what Jane Lee is working on. I get a seg fault
>> however
On 08/31/2018 06:06 PM, mrjonmatth...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been trying to use VectorTools::project_boundary_values_div_conforming in
a similar model to what Jane Lee is working on. I get a seg fault however when
I run it on multiple processes with a parallel::distributed::Triangulation. Is
it
I've been trying to use VectorTools::project_boundary_values_div_conforming
in a similar model to what Jane Lee is working on. I get a seg fault
however when I run it on multiple processes with a
parallel::distributed::Triangulation. Is it meant to work for distributed
triangulations?
I
If I understand this function correctly it is a function that projects a
> H(div)-vector field onto the Raviart-Thomas space. While this function is
> clearly useful it is in my opinion less well-suited to prescribe (scalar)
> normal fluxes.
No, that's exactly what it's supposed to do
If
Hi Jane Lee and Wolfgang,
If I understand this function correctly it is a function that projects a
H(div)-vector field onto the Raviart-Thomas space. While this function is
clearly useful it is in my opinion less well-suited to prescribe (scalar)
normal fluxes. If you were to do so you would
On 08/30/2018 04:35 AM, Jane Lee wrote:
I believe the Neumann conditions are strongly imposed.
And yes - I realised that inhomogeneous Neumann bc is ambiguous phrasing.
I mean that I have a conditions k grad p.n =g, or u.n = g equivalently,
I think this is in point 3 in my notes in my
Hi Jane Lee,
I recently came across a similar problem.
On Thursday, August 30, 2018 at 12:35:47 PM UTC+2, Jane Lee wrote:
>
> I believe the Neumann conditions are strongly imposed.
>
> And yes - I realised that inhomogeneous Neumann bc is ambiguous phrasing.
>
> I mean that I have a conditions
On 08/28/2018 08:07 AM, Jane Lee wrote:
I am trying to solve the equations in step-20 with inhomogeneous neumann bcs
on one of the boundaries and getting something very bizarre.
step-20 uses a mixed formulation in which both the pressure and the velocity
(in essence, the gradient of the
Dear all,
I am trying to solve the equations in step-20 with inhomogeneous neumann
bcs on one of the boundaries and getting something very bizarre.
I have a rectangular domain with the following:
1. Top boundary has homogeneous conditions: this is applied into the weak
form like in step-20
16 matches
Mail list logo
