I understand my mistake now: there are extra hanging nodes constraints in
the constraint matrix with (hanging nod constraints + PBC) compared to the
constraint matrix with only hanging node constraints.
That is why the minimal example fails.
Sambit
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 1:00:25 PM UTC
>
>
>> true, but I don't see why you would have the same norms if you distribute
> with constraints from hanging nodes only or constraints from hanging nodes+
> PBC.
> I think we can agree that the two ConstraintMatrix objects should be
> different as in the case of PBC you additionally need to
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 7:00:18 PM UTC+2, Sambit Das wrote:
>
> Hi Denis,
>
>
>> I don't think that's the case. The domain is indeed periodic, but this is
>> completely detached from location of support/nodal points.
>> Same applies to geometry, you will have different coordinates of ve
Hi Denis,
> I don't think that's the case. The domain is indeed periodic, but this is
> completely detached from location of support/nodal points.
> Same applies to geometry, you will have different coordinates of vertices
> across the PBC so
>
>
I agree, the location of nodal points is detach
Hi Sambit,
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 6:51:37 PM UTC+2, Sambit Das wrote:
>
> Hello dealii-team,
>
> I have created a failing test case in serial when hanging nodes+periodic
> constraints are mixed.
>
> *The algorithm of the test is follows: (attached *
> *minimalExampleHangingNodesPeriodicCo
