Dear Timo,
The main reason I do this is that I do not understand how to reuse this
decomposition in deal.ii.
I am relatively new to deal.ii and C++, and I have never used MUMPS before.
The way I set it up with SparseDirectUMFPACK was to use InnerPreconditioner
structure:
template
struct Inn
Jean-Paul is right. Most likely you don't adjust the quadrature order which
breaks LU factorization of the mass matrix, used by default for Generalized
Hermitian Eigenvalue Problem. Essentially your mass matrix is not positive
definite anymore.
Regards,
Denis
--
The deal.II project is locate
Dear Timo,
Because I do not understand how to reuse this decomposition in deal.ii.
I am relatively new to deal.ii and C++, and I have never used mumps before.
I would appreciate any advice on this. Maybe there is some example in deal.ii
that use mumps to construct a preconditioner.
Thank you ve
Hello everyone!
This is deal.II newsletter #5.
It automatically reports recently merged features and discussions about the
deal.II finite element library.
## Below you find a list of recently proposed or merged features:
#5113: Remove unused private function DoFHandler::reserve_space (proposed
Oh, even easier would be creating a 2d cylinder and then using
GridGenerator::extrude_triangulation()
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Timo Heister wrote:
> If you are just interested in a cylinder with more than a single
> layer, it might be easier to make k copies of the cylinder, shift
> them,
If you are just interested in a cylinder with more than a single
layer, it might be easier to make k copies of the cylinder, shift
them, and use merge_triangulations() to combine them into a single
mesh.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 5:00 AM, luca.heltai wrote:
> Dear Lucas,
>
> you could use GridTools
> template
> void Pa_Preconditioner::
> vmult(LA::MPI::BlockVector &dst, const LA::MPI::BlockVector &src) const
> {
> SolverControl cn;
> PetScWrappers::SparseDirectMUMPS solver(cn,mpi_communicator);
> solver.set_symmetric_mode(true);
> solver.solve(B,dst.block(0),src.block(0));
> solver.solve(B,ds
Dear Nitish,
I’m not familiar with this tutorial and I don’t have much to suggest, but I
have one basic question: When increasing the polynomial order of the finite
element, do you increase the corresponding quadrature order as well?
Regards,
Jean-Paul
> On 19 Sep 2017, at 14:53, Nitish Anand
Hey,
I wish to solve an eigenvalue problem for a rotating disk and to understand
more about the implementation I looked into the step-36 example.
Unfortunately, when I increase the degrees of freedom in the code (changing
line 70 to fe(3) or fe(2)) I get the following error.
Number of acti
Dear Lucas,
you could use GridTools::remove_anisotropy
Best,
Luca.
> On 18 Sep 2017, at 16:29, Lucas Campos wrote:
>
> Dear Bruno,
>
> You will find attached the resulting grids. While I originally expected to
> find new divisions only along the x-direction, your previous answer tells me
Dear Timo,
Thank you for your reply.
I am still having trouble with implementing my code with MUMPS.
I will briefly describe the problem:
I am solving 2 systems of Maxwell's equations in the following way:
the systems are Ax1=b1 and Ax2=b2;
A is a sparse block symmetric matrix (C -M; -M -C).
Dear Timo,
Thank you for your reply.
I am still having trouble with implementing my code with MUMPS.
I will briefly describe the problem:
I am solving 2 systems of Maxwell's equations in the following way:
the systems are Ax1=b1 and Ax2=b2;
A is a sparse block symmetric matrix (C -M; -M -C).
12 matches
Mail list logo