Thank you Stephane! This does work!
I am curious on how to choose the right mesh size (for
example, why use (9,9,5),(17,17,5),(33,33,5), not others?)
I tried a few others such as (34,34,5), and saw relatively
big deviation from the exact result.
-Wei
--On Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:26 PM +0100 Stephane Del
Pino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello !
The problem you are facing is due to a bad approximation
of the diffusion coefficient 'fk' due to your mesh
definition: you should have a mesh that follows the
conductivity discontinuities.
In fact, if your geometry is always this, you can use
your strategy using a structured mesh that fits the
geometry:
--------------
vector n = (33,33,5);
vector a = (-0.01,-0.01,0);
vector b = (0.01,0.01,0.0005);
mesh M = structured(n,a,b);
solve(u) in M
krylov(type=cg,precond=ichol)
{
test(w)
int(fk*grad(u)*grad(w)) = int[M zmin](w*q); //
u = 0 on M zmax;
}
---------------
if you change 'n' using (9,9,5),(17,17,5),(33,33,5) you
will notice the convergence. These values represent the
number of *vertices* for each direction.
If you *need* unstructured meshes, you must define a
better mesh and set different references for elements of
each zone.
Then, in ff3d, you can use these references using the
'reference' instruction: function fk =
reference(elements,M,ref1:f1[,ref2:f2[,...]]); for
instance if you want the conductivity to be 1E-3 for
element of reference 1 and g for elements of references
2, write:
function fk = reference(elements, M, 1:1E-3, 2:g);
Beware that if you do not define the function of an
existing reference, fk will be 0 on those elements...
Did you try to solve the problem with ANSYS using the
gmsh mesh?
Best regards,
Stéphane.
_______________________________________________
ff3d-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ff3d-users
_______________________________________________
ff3d-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ff3d-users
