Dear Wolfgang,
Thank you many times for your advice. In fact, simplifying the problem led
me to find the error in a totally unexpected (to me!) place in the code and
made me to define my problem more strictly.
Best Regards,
Ali
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 4:50 AM Wolfgang Bangerth
wrote:
> On
On 2/11/22 09:54, Ali Seddiq wrote:
Thanks very much for your advice. I definitely should and will follow that.
But may I still narrow my question for a clarification (with upcoming
complexity), and as a quick question ask if adding the boundary term through
cell_rhs +=... (as above, and
Dear Wolfgang,
Thanks very much for your advice. I definitely should and will follow that.
But may I still narrow my question for a clarification (with upcoming
complexity), and as a quick question ask if adding the boundary term
through cell_rhs +=... (as above, and very similar to step-7 in
On 2/8/22 09:12, Ali Seddiq wrote:
This is while if I change the pressure, naming it as U2 to another
scalar field variable , naming it as U1, it works, though I get zero
iteration for U1, and in fact it does not solve for U1.
For example if I write:
fe_face_values[U1].value(i, q_point) *...
Dear Wolfgang,
Sorry to raise this topic again. But when I add the boundary term to the to
cell_rhs on assembly_system, I receive the following message, based on
which most likely this addition leads to an invertible matrix:
An error occurred in line <457> of file
in function
void
On 1/31/22 11:41, Ali Seddiq wrote:
Thanks for a quick reply, and sorry for ambiguity. To be more precise
(trying to be) I should say the lines I modified with the aim of
creating a so-called "view" do not do that for my intended variable. My
question mainly was that if using the [ ]
Dear Wolfgang,
Thanks for a quick reply, and sorry for ambiguity. To be more precise
(trying to be) I should say the lines I modified with the aim of creating a
so-called "view" do not do that for my intended variable. My question
mainly was that if using the [ ] operator (that I added) does the
On 1/31/22 10:22, Ali Seddiq wrote:
I am trying to mimic step-7 implementation of Neumann boundary condition in
the case of a vector-valued problem.
I did some modifications as shown in the below, but it doesn't work as expected;
const FEValuesExtractors::Scalar pressure(0);
.
