Daniel,
Thank you for the clarification. The modified tutorial is working now.
James
On Thursday, April 16, 2020 at 5:24:37 PM UTC-4, Daniel Arndt wrote:
>
> James,
>
> I do find it interesting that the two meshes were not imported with the
>> same boundary IDs. I guess in the future I should a
James,
I do find it interesting that the two meshes were not imported with the
> same boundary IDs. I guess in the future I should assume that all boundary
> IDs are zero and reset them for each calculation? Also, is there a quick
> reference guide for what each boundary ID means? I have not ye
Jean-Paul,
The boundary ID output from the four different calculations are as follows
(before any boundary IDs are set to 6):
1) 3D, no imported mesh: equal numbers for boundary IDs 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and
5. This calculation converges to a solution (as expected).
2) 2D, no imported mesh: equal num
> It might be that one of the constrained boundaries is not traction free...
Correction: This should have read "It might be that one of the constrained
boundaries is now traction free..."
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://gr
Dear James,
To me, the most likely point of failure here relates to the application of
boundary conditions. It might be that one of the constrained boundaries is not
traction free, and so the problem is not free of rigid body modes. Can you
please confirm that you apply the same numbering schem
To Whom It May Concern,
I am learning deal.ii to work on problems in solid mechanics. In the
interest of computational efficiency, I plan to run most problems in 2D
(plane stress assumption). Since the interesting problems I am concerned
about require a non-trivial mesh, I learned how to use Gm
