Rajat,
I understand that this was not the most elegant way. To clarify, I had put the
declaration in the header file of the class so that I am sure that the vector
is not destroyed once the function exits. (This is how I debug, I need to
start learning gdb soon :) )
I do need to learn
Hello Professor,
The error is resolved when I used the template parameter
"PETScWrappers::Vector".
Thanks a lot for the help.
I understand that this was not the most elegant way. To clarify, I had put
the declaration in the header file of the class so that I am sure that the
vector is not
I was experimenting with Dealii examples and stumbled on some error I can not
find a reason for.
I modified the example step-36 by defining an area like a pyramid on top of a
truncated pyramid.
I constructed the truncated pyramid from 5 simplexes and top pyramid of 2
simplexes by merging
these
I read the FAQs page. As I understand now, it is because of the vector being
deleted while some object is still pointing to it.
Yes.
I have tried several things. I have kept the declaration of the vector in the
header file which means that the vector is not destroyed after exiting the
Respected Prof. Bangerth,
I read the FAQs page. As I understand now, it is because of the vector
being deleted while some object is still pointing to it.
I have tried several things. I have kept the declaration of the vector in
the header file which means that the vector is not destroyed
Here, I attached simple case that I encounter same error message.
Most of code is just same at that of step-5, but I am using mesh-file that
is made from other software. (I attach my mesh file too)
At constructor, there is a issue.
template
Step5::Step5 () :
triangulation
Dear Thomas,
Thank you. I checked the values and they are similar.
Within your predictor-corrector approach, I assume that you somehow
exchange data between each step in order to be able to interpolate the old
solution. Am I able to use the same functions to store energy data in each
Gauss
Dear Seyed Ali,
now I understand better. What you could do is to disable
the phase-field functionality in the program or to
choose G_c very high such that the phase-field will never
be activated. Then you only have the elasticity part
and can compare.
||
By the way Thomas, if you don't
Dear Thomas,
Exactly, I did that already. It seems it is identical, but I would like to
see, if your energy variable psi_e is identical to mine. This is quite
cumbersome for 500 elements or more to check. I mean the computation in the
first steps is anyway independent from the phase-field
