[deal.II] Re: Apply Neumann Boundary condition

Dear Benhour, Thank you for taking my point heart and providing more specifics about your actual problem. For the horizontal axis, I have considered the zero displacement along > y-axis because of symmetry. Is it correct? Should I fix the center of the > circle as well? > If you don't provid

[deal.II] Re: Apply Neumann Boundary condition

You should test your code step by step, figuring out exactly where the error occurs. And then propose a technical and accurate question here. Time is expensive, and the developers offer their kind help to us, then we should respect their time and help. 在 2016年12月2日星期五 UTC+8上午7:25:32，benhour@

[deal.II] Re: Apply Neumann Boundary condition

Dear Jean, I know that this website is not the code reviewer. I want to apply Neumann boundary condition on the curved side of my domain. It should be note that the domain is symmetry. I have considered half of a circle. It would be very kind of you if you let me know whether it is applied corre

Re: [deal.II] Re: mesh quality during deformations using MappingQEulerian

Hi Tom, > J-P, you (and the entire dealii community) are a paragon of encouragement, >> and I appreciate that very much. >> > Thank you, your kind words do mean a lot! > here's what I came up with yesterday > That's a handy piece of code to keep around. Thanks for sharing it! This works

[deal.II] Re: Apply Neumann Boundary condition

Dear Benhour, As I explained to someone else the day before yesterday, the point of this forum is not to provide a code review service without you having done due diligence on your s

[deal.II] Apply Neumann Boundary condition

Dear All, I want to apply non-zero neumann boundary condition on the curved domain of half of the circle. The way that I define my geometry, the boundary id and apply the Neumann B.C is written as follow: *Defining boundary id for different sections of domain (half_hyper_ball):* const d

Re: [deal.II] Wall time vs number of cores for MPI run

The problem has 70K DOFs. The simulation was performed in a Dell laptop which has a Intel core i5 430m processor. According to the Intel site, this processor has the following specifications; # of Cores 2 # of Threads 4 Processor Base Frequency 2.26 GHz Max Turbo Frequency 2.53 GHz Cache 3 MB S

[deal.II] Re: Trouble building dealii with p4est - undeclared variables in scope

Chris, On Thursday, December 1, 2016 at 10:56:13 AM UTC-5, Chris Coutinho wrote: > > With only p4est enabled, and P4EST_DIR pointing to the DEBUG folder of > version 0.3.4.1, I get the following errors associated with undeclared > variables in scope. The rest of the output can be found in the at

[deal.II] Trouble building dealii with p4est - undeclared variables in scope

Hello deal.ii users, I'm having trouble building dealii 8.4.2 with p4est support on OpenSUSE Leap 42.2, kernel 4.4.27-2-default, gcc/g++/gfortran version 4.8.5, openmpi 1.10.3 (MPI 3.0) I have successfully built deal.ii with MPI, PETSC, and METIS support and ran a few examples without a proble

Re: [deal.II] Wall time vs number of cores for MPI run

I wrote a code using deal.II. Now, I want to compare effect of the number of cores on the simulation time. The code is developed based on step-42 from deal.II tutorial. The code is executed in Ubuntu 14.04, Intel core i5 and 4GB ram as, mpirun –n ./code parameter_file.prm The obtained result

[deal.II] Wall time vs number of cores for MPI run

Dear all I wrote a code using deal.II. Now, I want to compare effect of the number of cores on the simulation time. The code is developed based on step-42 from deal.II tutorial. The code is executed in Ubuntu 14.04, Intel core i5 and 4GB ram as, mpirun –n ./code parameter_file.prm The

Re: [deal.II] Re: deal.ii and Reduced Basis method

Dear Jean-Paul and Wolfgang, thanks a lot for your replies! We contacted the developers of pyMOR who will help us to solve the RB problem, using deal.ii as an external software. Kind regards, Giulia Il giorno giovedì 1 dicembre 2016 13:07:58 UTC+1, Wolfgang Bangerth ha scritto: > > > Giulia, >

Re: [deal.II] Re: mesh quality during deformations using MappingQEulerian

> Its great that you're getting somewhere with this! > > J-P, you (and the entire dealii community) are a paragon of encouragement, and I appreciate that very much. After I wrote you yesterday I was able to figure out how to 'play a journal file' from within an embedded python session within deali

Re: [deal.II] Re: deal.ii and Reduced Basis method

Giulia, there are also this thesis https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/52960 and the pyMOR package has deal.II interfaces: http://pymor.org/ Best W. On 12/01/2016 01:05 AM, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote: Dear Giulia, Judging by the lack of reply it seems that no-one knows of (or has i

Re: [deal.II] constraining solution in a part of the domain

On 11/30/2016 04:56 PM, Anup Basak wrote: I am solving a heat equation and want to constrain solution to its initial values only in a *part of the domain*, and in rest of the part want to solve the equation. I would be thankful if someone could suggest a way to do this in dealii. If you want t

[deal.II] Re: deal.ii and Reduced Basis method

Dear Giulia, Judging by the lack of reply it seems that no-one knows of (or has implemented) an open-source library to specifically do model order reduction with deal.II. However, at least one of my colleagues uses deal.II to perform ROM via proper orthogonal decomposition, so deal.II definitel