On 01/27/2014 01:23 AM, Colin Cotter wrote: > >>> Sure. This is why it seems logical to me to constraint both trial and >>> test space by Laplace equation. Nevertheless I did not think it over a >>> much. >> >> For what it's worth, it seems logical to me as well... I just don't know >> how to impose the second constraint. >> >> So, if anyone could give me a hint or point me to a demo that shows how >> to constrain test functions, I'd be very happy. > > You don't need to constrain the test functions. This is actually the > whole point of the Lagrange multiplier. You end up with an equation with > the unconstrained test function, but if you choose a constrained test > function, the Lagrange multiplier term vanishes.
I don't think that enforcing an arbitrary constraint on my solution will be equivalent to requiring the test functions to satisfy Laplace's equation :-). So I guess you are saying that if I require the solution to satisfy *Laplace's equation* via a Lagrange multiplier, this is equivalent to constraining the test functions to satisfy Laplace's equation? Thanks! -Nikolaus _______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
