On Sat, 9 Nov 2013, Manav Bhatia wrote: > I was looking through the code for System::calculate_norm, and > wanted to see if it makes sense to use the > System::extra_quadrature_order for the qrule in calculating > norms. Currently it seems to be ignored.
Hmm... when we're calculating norms we're integrating nothing but shape functions, as opposed to evaluating possibly nasty constitutive laws and forcing functions. On affine elements, the default quadrature rule ought to give us exact integration for Hilbert norms (and over integration for L1/H1 type stuff). On the other hand, I suppose there's nothing *wrong* with letting users underintegrate norms, or even overintegrate norms if they're doing an infinity-norm or they're worried about the effects of the mappings on non-affine elements. I'd certainly be happy to accept a patch here. Put something in the doxygen comment on calculate_norm to document the effect, though? Thanks, --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
