[deal.II] Re: How to display displacements "in-plane" with paraview, not warp in the z-direction out of plane

Uwe is right, you definitely need to use the "warp by vector" tool. If you have no "vector" displacement field, but rather it two components as individual fields then you must first combine them using the calculator. On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 9:54:42 AM UTC+2, Uwe Köcher wrote: > > if you have

[deal.II] Re: fourth order tensor

Dear Anup, The subtle difference has to do with the symmetry of the tensors. In the first line of the notation, \mathcal{I} is defined such that A_{ab} = I_{abcd} A_{cd} = [\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd}] A_{cd} and A_{ba} = \bar{I}_{abcd} A_{cd} = [\delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}] A_{cd} . These respectively map

[deal.II] Re: deal__ paper on wave propagation

Have you had a look at this list of publications that acknowledge deal.ii? On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 1:21:52 AM UTC+2, Poonam Saini wrote: > > Hi All, > > can some one suggest research paper and code using dealii for wave > propagation? > Thanks in adv

[deal.II] Re: Doubt in FEvalues

If you physically move the mesh vertices, like you were discussing here , then when you call fe_values.reinit(cell), the mapping between the current cell geometry (as defined by the triangulation) and isoparametric cell are accounted fo

[deal.II] Re: Doubt in FEvalues

is created, it takes that as a > reference configuration and do all the gradients on this reference > configuration ? > > I also read the posts related to this issue here > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/dealii/mesh$20fevalues/dealii/KvqA-fQAYgM/yQdzNZsRSOUJ>

[deal.II] Re: Doubt in FEvalues

after mesh movement :: 1 0 0 1 > Volume after mesh movement: Using GridTools: 0.95 Calculated: 1 > > gradient at qpoint 0 after mesh movement and with new fe_values object :: > 1.05263 0 0 1 > > > > > > On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 at 3:19:13 PM UTC-4, Jean-Paul Peltere

[deal.II] Re: Periodic boundary conditions seem to be not applied

Hi Bastien, Which version of deal.II are you using? There is the recently added add_periodicity() function that helps join otherwise unrelated faces for distribut

[deal.II] Re: Doubt in FEvalues

without your support. > > Also, just to clarify, if the bug is indeed with Dof_handler then, why > making a new fe_values object (after mesh movement) in my code gave > correct gradients ? > > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 2:10:45 AM UTC-4, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >>

[deal.II] Re: Doubt in FEvalues

se a new fe_values object instead of the old one. > > I think we should make a comment about this as well. What do you say ? > > > > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 9:00:45 AM UTC-4, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> >> You're welcome. >> >> As to why c

[deal.II] Re: Periodic boundary conditions seem to be not applied

ww.dealii.org/8.4.0/doxygen/deal.II/classparallel_1_1distributed_1_1Triangulation.html#a9539cda687eeb08c602bceac11807987> > > function after initializing my mesh? > > Thanks again for your help, > > Bastien > > Thank you for the paper, I'll take a look at it and discus

[deal.II] Re: Read and write PETScWrappers::MPI::Vector to binary file

Hi Shiva, I do believe that the serialize() function is the one that you're looking for. Its a function thats inherited from the Subscriptor base class. J-P On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 12:

[deal.II] Re: changing step-25 based on step-40

For those who may be able to offer some advice, this is the full error message extracted from the discussion here : **> Time step #1 ; advancing to t = 0.2. [0]PETSC ERROR: - Error Mes

[deal.II] Re: changing step-25 based on step-40

system_rhs); Perhaps this has something to do with it? I'm not sufficiently familiar with distributed triangulations to say for sure that this is the problem. It looks like you may be trying to access an entry in the sparsity pattern that doesn't exist. On Tuesd

[deal.II] Re: Periodic boundary conditions seem to be not applied

Hi Bastien, There are a few potential problems here. 1. You're only refining cells along the top edge of your domain. Periodic boundaries can only have a difference of 1 refinement level between pairs of faces. 2. You may not be colouring any of your boundaries. This should be a

[deal.II] Re: changing step-25 based on step-40

s because of GL eq. > > On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 11:26:02 AM UTC-5, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> >> The one thing that I've noticed is that you're not using a constraint >> matrix, as is done in step-40: >> constraints.clear >> <https://d

[deal.II] Re: Periodic boundary conditions seem to be not applied

(collect_periodic_faces, >> match_periodic_face_pairs...) work together, so I could not make my >> constraints work. >> But I think that here lays the solution. So I tried to collect my >> periodic faces before any refinement, with the normal function of >> GridTools

[deal.II] Re: deal.ii and Trilinos

Hi Marco, Thats a good question. It doesn't look like its explicitly documented anywhere as to which packages deal.II *requires* Trilinos to be built with (i.e. utilises directly or offers some wrapped functionality for). I'll make a note to do this on the GitHub repository. Hints to the answ

[deal.II] Re: tensor product and polar decomposition

For the first question, if the tensors are of type Tensor then the * operator does a contraction over a single index . If the tensors are of type SymmetricTensor, then the * operator will perform a

[deal.II] Re: tensor product and polar decomposition

For the second question, if I'm not mistaken you must first compute the square root of the eigenvalues of C=F^{T}.F from which you can construct U or V. Thereafter its trivial to compute R. One way that you can do the eigenvalue computation is with the GNU scientific library (GSL). Otherwise yo

Re: [deal.II] Re: tensor product and polar decomposition

same contraction rules applies for two > 'SymmetricTensors' > as well, am I right? > > Thank you very much, > > Regards, > Anup. > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Jean-Paul Pelteret <> wrote: > >> For the first question, if the tensors are of type Tensor

[deal.II] Re: tensor contraction problem

Hi Anup, What version of deal.II are you using? In the documentation for version 8.4.0 such a function certainly exists . Anyway, in this case its probably unnecessary to explicitly specify the co

Re: [deal.II] Re: tensor contraction problem

Thanks for your reply. I am using version 8.3.0 and installed in February, > 2016. > Do you think in this version the problem is expected? > > Thanks, > > Anup. > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Jean-Paul Pelteret <> wrote: > >> Hi Anup, >> >

[deal.II] Re: non-homogeneous dirichlet boundary with constraint matrix. Get zero solution on the boundary.

Just to confirm, is this the solution to your problem? It seems likely that this is what you need to do. On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 8:09:24 AM UTC+2, Anders Ström wrote: > > You should call, > constraints.distribute(solution); > after solving the system. > > > -- The deal.II project is located

[deal.II] Re: casting a 4th order symm tensor to Tensor

Hi Anup, It looks like there's no constructor from which one can create a rank 4 tensor from a rank 4 symmetric tensor, nor an assignment operator. I've opened up an issue on GitHub here . It looks like you'll just have to copy out the entries manu

[deal.II] Re: Elasticity

Hi Benhour, As Denis has said, in order to help you it would definitely be useful for you to provide a better description of what you're trying to accomplish. Also, what have you tried thus far? Why/how has it not worked? In the mean time, the following paper provides a brief discussion on the

[deal.II] Re: non-homogeneous dirichlet boundary with constraint matrix. Get zero solution on the boundary.

No problem! I'm glad that you managed to figure it out :-) On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:09:08 AM UTC+2, Anders Ström wrote: > > yes, this solved it. I was going to marked as solved or close it but I > couldn't figure out how. > > Den måndag 13 juni 2016 kl. 08:17

[deal.II] Re: TrilinosWrappers::SolverDirect

Praveen, >From what I can discern, it seems that you've posted this twice: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/dealii/4TRWnmMywRI Do you have any objections to me deleting this post? J-P On Friday, June 24, 2016 at 8:37:45 AM UTC+2, Praveen C wrote: > > Dear all > > I am using the new Trilin

[deal.II] Re: On using TrilinosWrappers::SolverDirect

Praveen, I think that the problem is that you have an object that contains MPI data (like a MPI communicator) that is still in use/existence at the time that MPI_FINALIZE is called (generally by the Utilities::MPI::MPI_InitFinalize

[deal.II] Getting started and posting guidelines for new users

Hi there, and welcome to the deal.II user group forum! Presumably you've found yourself here from a web search or from the deal.II website . Are we interested in hearing your question and assisting you? Absolutely! We strive to be a friendly, helpful and inclusive communit

Re: [deal.II] Re: extract global node index (or DOF index) which belong to a specific boundary id

y, April 2, 2016 at 11:09:51 PM UTC+4:30, bangerth wrote: >> >> On 04/02/2016 08:07 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> > You can get the support points associated with the vertices using the >> > following method: >> > >> > | >> > cell-

[deal.II] Re: Error durind checkpoint / restart using parallel distributed solution transfer

Hi Rajat, Thanks for posting how you solved your problem! I'm glad to know that you found the issue, and this will be helpful to know. Perhaps we can mention/reinforce it in the documentation. Regards, J-P On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:22:06 PM UTC+2, RAJAT ARORA wrote: > > Hello, > > This is b

[deal.II] Re: Geometry and boundary conditions

Hi Benhour, Have you looked at any of the tutorials on geometry creation and solid mechanics? I believe that these specific points are covered there. Regards, J-P On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 5:21:30 PM UTC+2, benhour.amiria...@gmail.com wrote: > > Dear Daniel, > Thanks very much for your resp

[deal.II] Re: Error durind checkpoint / restart using parallel distributed solution transfer

ay ;-) On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 9:14:52 PM UTC+2, RAJAT ARORA wrote: > > Hello, > > Yes professor. I thought this might be helpful to anyone who gets a > similar error and is looking for a solution. > > On Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 3:58:05 AM UTC-4, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrot

[deal.II] Re: Triangulation.save() not working as expected

Hi Rajat, I suspect that this might be related to this issue , but we should wait for confirmation from someone with more knowledge on how the triangulation class works. Regards, J-P On Friday, July 8, 2016 at 9:56:07 AM UTC+2, RAJAT ARORA wrote:

[deal.II] Re: Deal.II does not pass quick tests after installation

Thanks for pointing that out David, I didn't see the picture in the reply. Since I can't edit the posts themselves, I've duplicated the post here and those that required "censoring". Nguyen's message follows: --- Dear Mr. Wells, I am sorry but if you would please kindly delete the a

Re: [deal.II] Re: Entry of the own problem in dealii

Dear Reza, Since this is question does not relate to your initial one, please ask it in a new post. Also, please see this post for some information as to what details you should provide us when trying to sort out compilation issues.

[deal.II] Re: PETScWrappers::SparseDirectMUMPS solver error

Dear Rajat, Unfortunately your question does not provide sufficient information for anyone to be able to help you. Although the error is in the solver, the source of the error could come from one of several places. Please see this post

[deal.II] Re: PETScWrappers::SparseDirectMUMPS solver error

0 --with-mpi=1 > --download-hypre=1 --with-cc=gcc --with-cxx=g++ --download-f2cblaslapack > --download-mpich --download-scalapack --download-mumps --download-parmetis > --download-metis* > > > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 1:08:37 AM UTC-4, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> >> Dea

[deal.II] Re: geometry

Dear Benhour, You could use one of the GridGenerator options to create a half circle, and then use GridGenerator::create_triangulation_with_removed_cells to remove the excess cells that

[deal.II] Re: Output problem of DG with degree =0

Dear Jiaqui, The issue here is that when you choose a piece-wise constant ansatz you end up with exactly the same number of DoFs as there are cells. deal.II usually treats the output of scalar cell data (e.g. if you were to output the material ID of each cell) in a special way, so you just need

[deal.II] Re: Dirichlet constraint to a specific node

Dear Anup, In addition to Daniel's approach, if you're using just linear shape functions then vertex_dof_index can also help here. See this post and this list of search results

[deal.II] Error building py-scipy on OSX 10.11

Dear all, This morning I updated from develop b9148b1 to c898b9d and am now running into problems building py-scipy on OSX 10.11.5 that I'm unable to resolve myself. I've attached the build logs. Does anyone have any ideas as to what I can do to fix this issue? Many thanks in advance for your

[deal.II] Re: Getting number of hanging support points

Dear Deepak, To the best of my knowledge, such functionality is not available in the library because, well, its not the normal type of information that one would be interested in. So you'll have to write the functionality yourself. What have you tried so far? How I would do it is by computing

Re: [deal.II] Re: Getting number of hanging support points

Hi Matthias, This was what I initially thought Deepak wanted, but he's doing p-refinement, so these aren't actually hanging nodes that he's querying. J-P On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 9:52:44 AM UTC+2, Matthias Maier wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 02:33 CDT, Jea

[deal.II] Re: Expanding on tutorial Step-44 to include a plastic constitutive model

Dear Samuel, Yes, it would definitely be possible to replace/augment the current constitutive law with a rate-dependent law. Beside a new definition of the stress and material tangent, you presumably also need to store some variables for you local problem and solve for them at the correct time.

[deal.II] Re: Expanding on tutorial Step-44 to include a plastic constitutive model

You could do this in one of 2 ways: Either you need to do combine the ::update/assemble_XYZ and ::update_assemble_XYZ into a single function, or you can leave them as they are and replace the WorkSteam::run call by the appropriate manual cell loop, e.g. WorkStream::run

Re: [deal.II] Re: Amesos_Superludist with TrilinoWrappers bad performance

Also, have you tried optimising the bandwidth of the sparse system by renumbering the DoFs ? On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 12:30:01 PM UTC+2, Matthias Maier wrote: > > > I have the feeling, that my setup is the root cause

Re: [deal.II] Re: Decoupling FECollection and QCollection

Dear Deepak, Its possible that the initial implementation of the functionality has changed, and that this part of the documentation was accidentally not updated. As best as I can tell, this sentence is referring to the default case where q_index and fe_index are not going to be prescribed (in w

Re: [deal.II] Re: Decoupling FECollection and QCollection

Thanks a lot for patching both parts of the documentation Wolfgang! On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 6:50:17 PM UTC+2, bangerth wrote: > > > Your answers clarified by doubt and thanks Wolfgang for updating it > already. > > I realize now that the same issue also applies to MappingCollection. Will >

[deal.II] Re: problem applying Dirichlet boundary condition

Dear Anup, The clue is in the name of your class. You should be providing the incremental update \Delta d^{t} for the position on the Dirichlet boundary, but you're specifying the total displacement d^{t}. Also, you're applying the constraint at all Newton iterations. So, in effect, you're appl

Re: [deal.II] long duration of the setup of step-40 like program

Hi Marek, If you do manage to determine an acceptable solution, perhaps you'd be willing to post the solution for other to reference at some later stage? Thanks, J-P On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 10:28:13 AM UTC+2, Marek Čapek wrote: > > Hello, > I believe I solved partially the problem, do > n

Re: [deal.II] Step-42 -- Problem with Trilinos and P4EST

Dear Eshan, Sometimes it is necessary to manually remove CMakeCache.txt before reconfiguring a project. Can you try to do this and see if you have any further success? Regards, J-P On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:42:25 PM UTC+2, Ehsan wrote: > > Dear Daniel, > I checked the "detailed.log" file

[deal.II] Re: Scaling grid coordinates

Hi Bruce, Yes there is, its called GridTools::scale . If you want to don't want to physically modify the grid again just for the purpose of writing it out after postprocessing, you could

[deal.II] Re: Extra layer around mesh

Dear Joel, The way I interpret what you've written here, you're asking two different questions. In the first statement, it sounds like you have a mesh that you wish to increase the size of at some arbitrary time, and the second you know the final bounds *a priori*. Let me start with your secon

Re: [deal.II] Re: Getting number of hanging support points

Hi Deepak, Ok, so I've created a minimal working example to demonstrate what you're seeing here. I'm not sufficiently familiar with the p-refinement part of the hp functionality/implementation to tell whether this is truly the expected behaviour or not. I see that the examples and description

[deal.II] Re: Installation/Tutorial 1 Issue

Hi Peter, How exactly did you compile the tutorial? Just for clarification, are you trying to use some custom build configuration or did you follow the standard guidelines (mentioned in the introduction to step-1 ),

[deal.II] Re: Strange issue with KellyErrorEstimator functionality

Dear Deepak, Have you run your code in debug mode to confirm that no errors are thrown? I have used the Kelly error estimator in the context of an hp problem with no issues. Have you tried increasing the number of face quadrature points (I notice that qrule starts at 1, but without knowing whic

Re: [deal.II] Re: Getting number of hanging support points

Ha ha. Dammit, what a silly mistake :-) Thanks Wolfgang! On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 11:08:17 PM UTC+2, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > On 08/25/2016 02:34 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: > > Hi Deepak, > > > > Ok, so I've created a minimal working example to demons

Re: [deal.II] Re: Getting number of hanging support points

Pelteret wrote: > > Ha ha. Dammit, what a silly mistake :-) Thanks Wolfgang! > > On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 11:08:17 PM UTC+2, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: >> >> On 08/25/2016 02:34 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> > Hi Deepak, >> > >> &g

[deal.II] Re: Vector-valued gradient of solution vector

Dear Joel, No, this functionality doesn't exist. However, you can create a quadrature rule with the quadrature points located at the support points (see the FAQ ), a

[deal.II] Re: variable time step in step44

Dear Anup, Why don't you reinterpret the parameter passed as "delta_t" to be the initial timestep size "delta_t_0" and then adjust the current timestep size "delta_t" however you want? How you do this adjustment algorithm-wise is, of course, entirely up to you. Regards, J-P On Tuesday, Augus

[deal.II] Re: applying 3D mesh in step-20

Dear Kyusik, If you open your original mesh file in Paraview (version 5.1 detects it as an AVS UCD file) and you clip the mesh to view its section, then I think you'll see the problem. Although the mesh looks fine from the outside, all of the inner vertices of your torus converge on an annulus

[deal.II] Re: applying 3D mesh in step-20

Image attached to clarify of what I've indicated. On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: > > Dear Kyusik, > > If you open your original mesh file in Paraview (version 5.1 detects it as > an AVS UCD file) and you clip the mesh to view

[deal.II] Re: applying 3D mesh in step-20

Is it okay If I use Prism cell instead of the Hexahedron cell in UCD > format?? Can the deal.II treat the Prism cell?? > > And, Do you also agree with that "SphericalManifold boundary" is not > related to this problem?? > > Thank you. > > Regard > Kyusik > > 20

[deal.II] Re: nearest neighbor

Hi Joel, Do you mean the index to a vertex? And by nearest, do you mean the vertex that shares the shortest common edge with the specified vertex? If so, then no. But it shouldn't be hard to write such a function. You would need to find all cells that share the initial vertex (I believe this is

[deal.II] Re: modify solution vector

Hi Ilya, You should have a look at some of the previous discussions on the use of the cell->vertex_dof_index function; this provides an easy link between vertices and degrees of freedom. In summary, and assu

[deal.II] Re: Tensor with variable components

Dear Benhour, I'm afraid that your question falls out of the scope of those suitable for the forum (please see this post ). It is too vague and abstract, and to be honest you could spend some time constructing a small case to work thi

Re: [deal.II] Re: variable time step in step44

date my time step in the run() function how can I pass this new > time step, say 'delta_t' to the class 'Time' > to obtain other parameters like current_time etc. > > Thanks and regards, > Anup. > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret &

[deal.II] Re: singularity error due to 1/0

Hi Kyusik, r is calculated by "r=sqrt(x^2+y^2) ", and theta is calculated by > "theta=x/y" At the very least, your definition of theta in the (radial) coordinate system is incorrect. See the wikipedia page f

[deal.II] Re: singularity error due to 1/0

lts when you evaluate one of the poles or at the origin. const double theta = std::atan2(y,x); On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 2:29:13 PM UTC+2, hanks0...@gmail.com wrote: > > Oh, sorry my mistake > > Not theta=x/y in my code but theta=atan(x/y) > > > 2016년 9월 5일 월요일 오후 9시 22분 4

[deal.II] Re: Failing to set up simple test configuration

Hi Alex, numdiff: output: No such file or directory > /usr/bin/diff: output: No such file or directory > It appears that you might be missing some of the programs necessary to check your test's output against the "blessed" result. Can you you check that you have numdiff and diff installed and i

[deal.II] Re: Failing to set up simple test configuration

Great, glad that you sorted it out! By the way, there's recently been a discussion on GitHub related to running deal.II on windows. Its interesting to hear that you've got it running on Windows 10. Out of curiosity, how have you configured deal.II?

[deal.II] Re: Failing to set up simple test configuration

sue > if I could find where the code is that is causing the error "Can't do > inplace edit on > /mnt/c/Users/Alexander/UbuntuShared/dimice-heat-dealii/build/tests/cylinder.debug/output: > > No such file or directory." Unfortunately I'm completely unfamiliar with

[deal.II] Re: After the calculation, Can the result be used??

Hi Kyusik, If you mean that you want to extract the solution at the quadrature points then this certainly is possible. You can do with functions like those in FEValues::get_function_values

[deal.II] Re: Vector-valued gradient of solution vector

n(z),2.0); > } > > Where solution is the vector valued Vector that is 3 times bigger that the > scalar Vector called size. > > Best, > Joel > > On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 6:48:46 PM UTC+2, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: >> >> Dear Joel, >> >> No, th

[deal.II] Re: Calculate surface integral over a boundary

Hi Dragan, What is it that you're trying to evaluate? Although you don't specifically mention it, as you're wanting to do this in post-processing I presume that you're wanting to evaluate something to do with the solution? If so, then you can use the get_function_values

[deal.II] Re: Loading DoFHandler from Archive

Hi Benjamin, I'm afraid that I don't have any knowledge of the save/load functionality in deal.II, but maybe someone who has experience with this part of the code (one of the ASPECT users, perhaps?) may be willing to comment on this. Just to clarify though - this is not a bug per se, but more a

[deal.II] Re: dealii website

Dear Xiaohan, Yes, the website is down. A message was sent out about this a couple of weeks ago. Regards, J-P On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 9:00:23 PM UTC+2, Xiaohan Zhang wrote: > > Hi > > Is deal.ii website down? I am trying to

[deal.II] Re: Unique (Continuous) Gradient at Edges/Vertices

Hi Andreas, I've had to do something similar in a different context. You could compute the L2-projection of the solution gradient using VectorTools::project. You'd need to define a new DoFHandler for the gradient components and define a function that returns the value of the solution gradient a

[deal.II] Re: Unique (Continuous) Gradient at Edges/Vertices

lly elegant. It should work in principle. > I will try out to get around the FEFieldFunction and get back to this > thread afterwards. > > > Best, > Andreas > > > > Am Mittwoch, 28. September 2016 10:40:19 UTC+2 schrieb Jean-Paul Pelteret: >> >> Hi Andre

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

Hi Deepak, You've chosen a difficult example for us to evaluate, because your implementation of the plane stress condition is rather hard to follow. Can you provide a reference from which you're implementing this? At the very least your implementation of "add_point_source_to_rhs" looks suspici

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

3) In addition, I would like to know whether I can use > *Ve* > *ctorTools::create_point_source_vector *for the same? This function used > to help me for bilinear elements. > > Best regards > Deepak > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Jean-Paul Pelteret <> wrote: &

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

, I need > to keep it a point load. Would that still be possible with traction > boundary condition? > > Best, > Deepak > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret > wrote: > >> Dear Deepak, >> >> Its always easier to help debug a well

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

would expect a bit of difference but not this much. > > Do you think the source term implementation is correct? I added force term > only in the two cells on the ride side. > > Best regards > Deepak > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret > wrote: > >

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

values. Could you divert me to an example or discussion > where this is done. > > Best > Deepak > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Jean-Paul Pelteret > wrote: > >> Hi Deepak, >> >> Its not pretty but at a glance this does look plausibly correct. T

[deal.II] Re: The C++ compiler "C:/Program Files (x86)/Dev-Cpp/MinGW64" is not able to compile a simple test program.

Dear Loukit, Unfortunately deal.II does not officially support Windows. Here's a link with some more information as to how you might get a working version through Windows. There was also a

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

e-12){ >> *system_rhs(cell->vertex_dof_index(v-1, 1)) = 0;* >>* system_rhs(cell->vertex_dof_index(v-1, 2)) = 1;* >> //system_rhs[global_dof_indices[2*v]] = 0; >> //system_rhs[global_dof_indices[2*v + 1]] = 1; >

Re: [deal.II] Using p-refinement with high order elements

//system_rhs[global_dof_indices[2*v + 1]] = 1; >> } >> } >> >> I will check and get back with the updated code, in case I do not figure >> out the error :) >> >> Best regards >> Deepak >> >

[deal.II] Re: using .vtk file as initial condition

Dear Anup. I notice that this question has been asked before , but remains without an answer. I'm not sure that this is possible - so far, save

[deal.II] Re: Pressure BC

Dear Lisa, There are numerous tutorials that cover the application of pressure BCs for various media. Your question is far too general to be answered effectively: - Are you implementing this for a fluid or solid material? - If a soli

[deal.II] Re: Pressure BC

t; I just would like to implement a simple constant pressure BC for a solid >> material in the referential configuration. >> Pressure is constant and independent. I want to model a pressurized >> cylinder. >> Thanks. >> Lisa >> >> >> On Wednesday, Octob

[deal.II] Re: Solution Components of a Vector valued problem

Dear Lisa, You should have a look at some of the previous discussions on the use of the cell->vertex_dof_index function (as well as its documentation

[deal.II] Re: How to use Trilinos instead of Petsc in step-40

Hi Hamad, Can you please tell us which version of deal.II you are using, and provide us with the installation logs? Regards, J-P On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 11:51:09 PM UTC+2, Hamed Babaei wrote: > > Hi friends, > > I want to use Trilinos instead of Petsc in my parallel code which is based

Re: [deal.II] Problem with PETScWrappers::SolverCG

Dear Hamed, You are duplicating your posts in two threads. This is not productive, so I'm going to ask you to please focus this topic within your other thread . You have been given some useful advice there that you should follow up on.

Re: [deal.II] Caught signal number 11 SEGV: Segmentation Violation, probably memory access out of range

For later reference, this conversation has now been moved to this thread . On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 6:01:22 PM UTC+2, Hamed Babaei wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > I hope you are doing well. I've been struggling to run step-40 using > Tr

[deal.II] Re: Solution Components of a Vector valued problem

> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21searchin/dealii/vertex_dof_index%7Csort:relevance> > > which gets the global index and points to the first cell which which the > corresponding index belongs to. > > Thanks. > Lisa > > On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 1:36:19 PM UTC+2

[deal.II] Re: Defining tensor in different dim and spacedim

Dear Benhour, I'd like to help you but I really don't understand your question. Since its templated on the [space] dimension, the PointHistory class that you've displayed here is potentially suitable for either codimension 0 problems (dependent on your implementation of a constitutive law, of c

[deal.II] Re: Defining tensor in different dim and spacedim

Dear Benhour, Thank you for providing a little more context, but you still have not articulated what the actual problem is. What exactly do you mean by "I have some problem with defining elasticity matrices"? Please see this post , in

[deal.II] Re: How to apply boundary values for a particular point on the boundary instead of the whole boundary surface

Dear Hamed, The problem here is that VectorTools::interpolate_boundary_values always applied boundary values to surfaces in 3d, or lines in 2d. You cannot directly apply point constraints using this function. What is happening here is that you've set a component mask which says that for ALL of

[deal.II] Re: Error in GridIn::read_abaqus for a mesh with two blocks

Hi Oded, Two things: 1. The documentation originally stated that "Files generated using Cubit 11.x, 12.x and 13.x are valid", but I see that its now been updated to include 14.x and 15.x. I personally don't know whether this works with newer versions of Cubit, but hopefully it has indeed been t

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >