On 11/24/20 7:37 AM, jie liu wrote:
The file attached contains functions that might be a solution to the problem
posted. They work well for me. I hope this would be helpful for people who
have not solved the problem.
Jie -- would you be interested in making this code into a pull request? We
Dear all,
The file attached contains functions that might be a solution to the
problem posted. They work well for me. I hope this would be helpful for
people who have not solved the problem.
Best regards,
Jie
On Monday, March 18, 2019 at 6:18:54 PM UTC+1 Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> On 3/16/19
On 3/16/19 7:12 AM, Konrad wrote:
>
> Tried it with BDM elements but it does not work. I strongly think about
> starting to contribute to deal.ii.
I'm glad to see that you've already found the issue, but I would like to add
that I think this here would be a really good idea! :-) We are always
Thank you, Daniel. That confirms my intuition about that. The push forward
from the ref cell to physical cells is, I found after thinking about it
again, for RaviartThomas, BDM, Nedelec elements etc not the same as a Piola
transform (which eliminates scaling but not rotation). My code works now
Konrad,
I implemented a class derived from the Function class that evaluates
a scalar or vector shape function at a given (set of) point(s) in a
physical cell. If I check the output graphically I see that the vector
shapefunctions on the physical cell, for example for lowest order
On 3/10/19 4:09 AM, Konrad wrote:
>
> just a quick question. Is there a special reason why for example the function
> VectorTools::project_boundary_values_div_conforming is restricted to
> Raviart-Thomas elements? The principle should be the same for example for
> Brezzi-Douglas-Marini
Hi all,
just a quick question. Is there a special reason why for example the
function VectorTools::project_boundary_values_div_conforming is restricted
to Raviart-Thomas elements? The principle should be the same for example
for Brezzi-Douglas-Marini elements, right? Or am I missing something
