Re: [deal.II] Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Thanks Jean-Paul and Wolfgang, I'll give a try on parallel::fullydistributed::Triangulation as adding FE_nothing would still have that issue of memory. If I don't get success, I'll circle back with you on FE_nothing. Thanks Reza On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 5:19 PM Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: > Hi

Re: [deal.II] Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Hi Reza, With no context as to how element deletion affects the geometry itself, may I ask if you’ve considered element deactivation using the FE_Nothing element? If you can afford to store the mesh but primarily want to ensure that no DoFs are assigned to a region outside of the physical

Re: [deal.II] Re: Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

On 4/20/21 2:12 PM, mohammadreza yaghoobi wrote: Just a quick question to warm up! does GridGenerator::create_triangulation_with_removed_cells or something similar is available for this class? I think the workflow would be different. The function above takes an existing triangulation (which

Re: [deal.II] Re: Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Thanks Wolfgang. That's a really good news as this is our biggest current bottleneck. Just a quick question to warm up! does GridGenerator::create_triangulation_with_removed_cells or something similar is available for this class? Thanks Reza On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:05 PM Wolfgang Bangerth

Re: [deal.II] Re: Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

On 4/20/21 1:58 PM, mohammadreza yaghoobi wrote: The ideal case would be each processor just handling their own part and some reduction happened throughout the processors. Reza -- the parallel::distributed::Triangulation class was written under the assumption that storing artificial cells

Re: [deal.II] Re: Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Thanks Marc. My biggest challenges are both time and memory. I'm trying to model a crystal plasticity sample with ~20 million elements. In the case of no element deletion, I can simply use global refinement and I won't face memory issues while generating mesh and running the code (and of course

Re: [deal.II] LineMinimization and p-Laplace

Hi Julie, So I was correct that in that the bracket evaluations converge towards one another, until they are equal to machine precision. It would be good if you could attach the full log, because I think that one interesting part where the values of the “f" and "g" function change sign has

[deal.II] Re: Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Hello Reza, `parallel::distributed::Triangulation` objects store the entire coarse mesh, see also the module documentation . This allows for a quick execution of adaptive refinement. So from my understanding, you need to

Re: [deal.II] interpolate FE_Nelelec

Dear John, As Jean-Paul pointed out the entries of the solution vector for a Nedelec element have a different meaning. The entries are weights that result from edge moments (and in case of higher order also face moments and volume moments), i.e, integrals on edges. Nedelec elements have a deep

Re: [deal.II] interpolate FE_Nelelec

Hi John, Unfortunately, you’ve fallen into the trap of confusing what the entries in the solution vector mean for the different element types. For Nedelec elements, they really are coefficients of a polynomial function, so you can’t simply set each coefficient to 1 to visualise the shape

[deal.II] Removing cells in parallel distributed triangulation

Hi, I'm trying to subtract some elements based on a user-defined criteria. Ideally, I want to use each processor in a way that they are responsible only for their partition (using is_locally_owned()) to remove the cells from the triangulation using

Re: [deal.II] Unable to collect periodic faces

Vachan, Maybe the boundary information is not transferred to the deal.II Triangulation when calling GridIn::read_msh. I would recommend checking the triangulation after reading it in and modify the boundary indicators manually if necessary. Best, Daniel Am Di., 20. Apr. 2021 um 03:37 Uhr

Re: [deal.II] LineMinimization and p-Laplace

Hi Bruno and Jean Thanks a lot for the answers. Sorry to reply this late, was busy with other PhD duties. I did have a look at KINSOL when encountered the problem for the first time, I think it would be a convenient tool for more stable nonlinear problems. @Jean: here is the dealllog

[deal.II] Unable to collect periodic faces

Dear all, I have a simple cube gmsh file (annexed) which I want to read, and assign a periodic BC to it. I export the mesh to 'msh2' format and then read it using GridIn. I then call collect_periodic_faces()