Thank you very much Matt.
I have given selfp a try and I am even more convienced that the pressure
mass matrix must be implemented!
Regards,
Nicolas
2016-12-14 15:24 GMT+01:00 Matthew Knepley :
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Karin wrote:
>
>>
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Karin wrote:
> Lawrence, Matt,
>
> I really do share your point.
> Nevertheless there are sometimes good reasons to do things "not the best
> way they should be done", at least in a first time (here PETSc is used
> within a huge
Lawrence, Matt,
I really do share your point.
Nevertheless there are sometimes good reasons to do things "not the best
way they should be done", at least in a first time (here PETSc is used
within a huge fortran-based general purpose finite element solver and build
and extract the pressure mass
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Karin wrote:
> Dear Petsc-gurus,
>
> I am solving Biot's poroelasticity problem :
> [image: Images intégrées 1]
>
> I am using a mixed P2-P1 finite element discretization.
>
> I am using the fieldsplit framework to solve the linear
Thank you very much for this preprint, Lawrence. I have also planned to use
the pressure mass matrix for the A11 block.
Unfortunately, at this time, I have no time for implementing things. What I
would like to do is to get the best out of the built-in methods of
fieldsplit/PETSc.
Any hint is
On 13/12/16 16:50, Karin wrote:
> Dear Petsc-gurus,
>
> I am solving Biot's poroelasticity problem :
> Images intégrées 1
>
> I am using a mixed P2-P1 finite element discretization.
>
> I am using the fieldsplit framework to solve the linear systems. Here
> are the options I am using :
>
Dear Petsc-gurus,
I am solving Biot's poroelasticity problem :
[image: Images intégrées 1]
I am using a mixed P2-P1 finite element discretization.
I am using the fieldsplit framework to solve the linear systems. Here are
the options I am using :
-pc_type fieldsplit
-pc_field_split_type schur