Re: [deal.II] Re: discontinuity and overlap of elements in 2D thermoelasticity problem using quadratic elements

; it by not passing the Eulerian map to DataOut but rather transforming the > body in the postprocessor itself (e.g. using Paraview's warp tool). > > Regards, > Jean-Paul > > > On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 7:27:57 AM UTC+1, Anup Basak wrote: >> >> Dear Jean-Paul, >

[deal.II] Re: discontinuity and overlap of elements in 2D thermoelasticity problem using quadratic elements

y, January 21, 2017 at 4:07:00 AM UTC+1, Anup Basak wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I have solved a 2D mechanics (thermoelasticity) problem based on step 44 >> using quadratic elements (FE_Q). When I plot the solution in the deformed >> configuration (attached her

[deal.II] using FEValues extractor for a

Hello all, I am solving for a 3 dimensional displacement vector (*dim+1* dimensional) in a *dim=2* dimensional space (for a planer problem in elasticity). Hence I consider an FEvaluesExtractor: const FEValuesExtractors::Vector u_fe; and initialize it as u_fe(0) Now I need to compute the

[deal.II] a query from step44

Hello all, I am going to solve a generalized plane stain problem based on step 44. I have three displacement components (3 dofs per node) on a 2D geometry (dim =2) and mesh (compressible material hence no pressure). All displacements are function of x and y coordinates only, i, e u = u(x,y),

[deal.II] problem in lower dimensional grid in higher dimensional space

Hello all, I am trying to solve a mechanics problem in a 2D parallelogram (reference body) in a 3D space. In doing so I have started with generating grids and just want to plot it in eps file. I am expecting a parallelogram at z=0 surface in a 3D space. However, when I execute the command

[deal.II] constraining solution in a part of the domain

Hello all, I am solving a heat equation and want to constrain solution to its initial values only in a *part of the domain*, and in rest of the part want to solve the equation. I would be thankful if someone could suggest a way to do this in dealii. Thanks and regards, Anup. -- The deal.II

Re: [deal.II] what to do with Neumann term in week formulation when applying Periodic Boundary Condition

Dear Prof. Bangerth, Thank you very much for your reply. I got your points. Regards, Anup. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Wolfgang Bangerth <bange...@colostate.edu> wrote: > On 11/30/2016 03:26 PM, Anup Basak wrote: > >> >> Let us consider an 1D domain with per

Re: [deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

Many thanks Daniel for your help. On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Arndt < d.ar...@math.uni-goettingen.de> wrote: > Anup, > > Looking at the resulting mesh after using grid_y_transform, the mesh is > still rectangular. > Therefore, it is not surprising that make_periodicity_constraints

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

ave a look. ;-) > > Best, > Daniel > > Am Dienstag, 29. November 2016 17:22:39 UTC+1 schrieb Anup Basak: >> >> Hello Daniel, >> >> I am attaching a slightly modified version for better readability. In >> actual code >> I read the values from a .prm fil

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

Hello Daniel, I am attaching a slightly modified version for better readability. In actual code I read the values from a .prm file. Thanks, Anup. On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 9:52:40 AM UTC-6, Anup Basak wrote: > > Hello Daniel, > > Thanks for your reply and help. I am atta

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

Hello Daniel, Thanks for your reply and help. I am attaching a part of the code herewith. Thanks and regards, Anup. On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 9:41:19 AM UTC-6, Daniel Arndt wrote: > > Anup, > > I am trying to implement the periodic boundary condition for a nonlinear >> parabolic

[deal.II] a small issue with step44

Dear developers, I see a small issue in function 'solve_nonlinear_timestep( BlockVector _delta)' of step44. If the 'for' loop corresponding to the Newton iteration is considered in its present form, the exception in the end

[deal.II] condition number

Hello all, I wanted to know the condition number of my system_matrix and hence I have used the line in blue (below) in my CG solve function. It shows the condition number. But in the documentation the definition of this is not mentioned. I mean when I store my system matrix and calculate its

Re: [deal.II] Re: Question about Step 44 shape function gradient computations

Hi all, The attached pdf might be useful. There is some notational difference from step44, but it is defined here. Thanks, Anup On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Andrew McBride wrote: > Dear Claire > > You might also be interested in the one-field version of step-44

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

, Regards, Anup. On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 7:31:08 PM UTC-6, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > On 11/07/2016 06:11 PM, Anup Basak wrote: > > > > It seems that to work with load() and save() one needs to work with > boost > > packages. > > I was wondering if it

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

Thank you Jean-Paul and Prof. Bangerth for the references. I will work on it now. Regards, Anup. On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 5:59:49 PM UTC-5, Anup Basak wrote: > > Dear all, > > I have a solution saved in two .vtk files for a mechanics problem > (displacement, stress, stra

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

in another simulations with the identical triangulation data. Or if there is some other simpler way. Thanks and regards, Anup. On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 6:23:09 PM UTC-5, Anup Basak wrote: > > Dear Jean-Paul and Timo, > > Thank you very much for your reply. > > I would

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

t to implement such functionality. But things could get > tricky > > if you are using parallel data structures. > > > > Regards, > > J-P > > > > > > On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 12:59:49 AM UTC+2, Anup Basak wrote: > >> > >> Dear all, &

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

_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, August 30, 2016 at 7:02:41 PM UTC+2, Anup Basak wrote: >>

[deal.II] variable time step in step44

Hello all, I was trying to implement an adaptive time step in step44. In the given example 'delta_t' has been considered to be fixed and its value is taken from the .prm file. Now let us say one changes the value of 'delta_t' in the function 'run()'. What will be the convenient way to replace

[deal.II] problem applying Dirichlet boundary condition

Dear All, I am solving a mechanics problem based on the finite strain problem in Step 44. I need to apply non-zero Dirichlet boundary condition for displacement in one of the outer boundary of a square 2D domain. I have considered a class called 'IncrementalBoundaryValues' (a part of the code

[deal.II] store data of specific nodes

Hello all, I want to store the solution data corresponding to the nodes within a specific part of the domain. If anyone has idea how it can be done, kindly let me know. Thanks in advance, Regards, Anup. -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum

Re: [deal.II] Re: introduce random initial condition

wrote: > Anup, > > I assume that your solution at time t_1 depends on the solution at time > t_0. If you use Lagrangian FE, you just need to fill your vector solution > at t_0 with random values between T_0 and T_1. > > Best, > > Bruno > > > On Tuesday, July 5,

[deal.II] introduce random initial condition

Dear All, I am solving a heat conduction equation and want to impose random distribution of temperature, say between T_0 to T_1, as an initial condition over the entire domain. I shall be thankful if someone can tell me how to introduce in dealii. Thanks and regards, Anup. -- The deal.II

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

entries manually for now. > > J-P > > > On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 1:07:56 AM UTC+2, Anup Basak wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I want to cast a 4th order SymmetricTensor<4, dim> to a Tensor<4, dim> >> and have used the following command: >&g

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

; > or, if you think its sensible, > SymmetricTensor<2, dim> A = symmetrize(Tensor<2, dim>(B)*Tensor<2, > dim>(C)); > > J-P > > > On Sunday, June 12, 2016 at 10:59:30 PM UTC+2, Anup Basak wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I am trying

[deal.II] tensor contraction problem

Hello all, I am trying to calculate the following tensor multiplication (I am using dealii 8.3.0. and installed in February, 2016): A_{ij} = B_{ik} C_{kj} where B and C are both symmetric tensors. Since using B*C would lead to a scalar, I am trying to calculate using 'contract' command.

[deal.II] tensor product and polar decomposition

Hello all, I have two quires regarding tensor product and polar decomposition. 1. Suppose I want to multiply two second order tensors with a fourth order tensor to get a forth order tensor as follows: A_{ijkl} = B_{im} C_{mjkn} D_{nl}. It is clear that we have a single index contraction with

[deal.II] fourth order tensor

Hi all, I have a confusion regarding 4th order symmetric tensor. I need the fourth order symmetric tensor \mathcal S, as defined in step 44. After defining \mathcal S in the introduction, it is mentioned that "The fourth-order SymmetricTensor