env/gcc/gcc")
>
> must become
>
> set(DEAL_II_CXX_COMPILER "/Applications/
> deal.II.app/Contents/Resources/Libraries/bin/mpicxx")
> set(DEAL_II_C_COMPILER "/Applications/
> deal.II.app/Contents/Resources/Libraries/bin/mpicc")
>
> Luca
&
Dear all,
after updating my Intel Mac to
Sonoma 14.6.1
Xcode 15.4
xcode-select version 2408
AppleClang 15.0.0
I have problems reinstalling deal.II.
I tried
the
https://github.com/dealii/dealii/releases/download/v9.5.2/dealii-9.5.2-sonoma-intel.dmg
package ending up in cmake errors (attached)
to `cmake --
build` or `make`), but to be safe you need to have at least 2 GB of
free RAM per build process.
Hope that helps.
Best regards,
Alexander
On Fri, 2024-03-15 at 08:41 -0700, Kyle Schwiebert wrote:
> I decided to switch from compiling my user codes with clang instead
> of gcc, an
deal.ii-9.5.0
Processor: 3.6 GHz 8-Core Intel Core i9
macOS: Sonoma 14.0
xcode-select version 2399.
There seems to be an issue with compiler compatability. I recieve the
following error when attempting to compile one of my projects (%cmake .):
-- The C compiler identification is AppleClang 15.0.0
:
> Fascinating. One additional option to install deal.II that I did not know
> about.
>
> Anyone familiar with conda packaging?
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 11:05 AM Alexander wrote:
> >
> > FYI, conda package is used quite extensively. >4k installations of 9. 3.
FYI, conda package is used quite extensively. >4k installations of 9.3.2:
https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/dealii/files
On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 5:02:56 PM UTC+1 Alexander wrote:
> There is one here: https://github.com/conda-forge/dealii-feedstock
>
> But it looks like is not ma
There is one here: https://github.com/conda-forge/dealii-feedstock
But it looks like is not maintained and updated anymore.
Did you consider create and maintain an own feedstock?
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https
On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 19:17 -0700, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> On 1/16/23 06:29, Alexander Kiselyov wrote:
> > I'm trying to solve inhomogeneous Maxwellian equations in 4-
> > potential
> > form in 3D space. In terms of math it is equivalent to solving a
> > system
s
specifically in the temporal domain?
Best regards,
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"deal.I
Daniel,
Thanks a lot for your reply, it answers my question fully!
Regards,
Alexander
On Tue, 2022-11-22 at 10:12 -0500, Daniel Arndt wrote:
> Alexander,
>
> Yes, we are identifying DoFs on faces and thus FE_DGQ doesn't have
> any DoFs on faces.
>
> Best,
> Daniel
&g
about why FE_DGQ doesn't contain face DoFs.
Is the reason that in this case DoF indices would be different when
looking on either sides of a face?
Regards,
Alexander
On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 08:43 -0800, Peter Munch wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> You are using FE_DGQ, which per definition o
`FESystem::max_dofs_per_face()`, surprisingly, returns 0. See the
attachment for a minimal example. The problem persists when running on
a single process. The version of deal.II used is 9.4.0.
What am I doing wrong here? Is there a better way to globally identify
a face?
Best regards,
Alexander Kiselyo
Dear Vinta
for 2-D, you could consider resorting to FE_Nedelec, which supports hanging
nodes. In contrast to the 3-D case, FE_Nedelec should work even for (some)
non-standard grids in 2-D.
Best
Alexander
On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 4:46:32 AM UTC+2 Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> On 10/23
Thank you very much, Jean-Paul! I have totally forgot that deal.II has
a wiki in addition to doxygen documentation!
Best regards,
Alexander Kiselyov
On Fri, 2022-07-15 at 22:51 +0200, Jean-Paul Pelteret wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> The answer that Wolfgang gave is the one that you want
aving their own mesh refinement loops). It
seems that in this case VectorTools::interpolate_to_different_mesh has
to be used, am I right?
Best regards,
Alexander Kiselyov
On Fri, 2022-07-15 at 13:36 -0600, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> On 7/15/22 08:36, Alexander Kiselyov wrote:
> >
> > Wh
e the B's
solution to the FE system used to solve A, but there might be an RHS
incompatible with FE_Nedelec elements.
Which tools could be used to overcome this problem? Or is my approach
deficient in general?
Best regards,
Alexander Kiselyov
--
The deal.II project is located at http:
cell iterator from Triangulation or DoFHandler.
Best regards,
Alexander Kiselyov
On Thu, 2022-07-07 at 12:55 -0700, Peter Munch wrote:
> The problem is that ECL is not working with AMR, yet.
>
> A technical issue is that one cannot that easily loop over 2*dim
> faces and compute the fl
manually. Don't forget to edit candi.cfg to
specify the deal.II version and the needed features.
Regards,
Alexander
On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 20:18 -0700, ME20D503 NEWTON wrote:
> Dear users,
> i am facing some problem while installing deal.ii. installation has
> been completed upto 100% but
Thank you very much for the reply! Copied my letter to
https://github.com/hyperdeal/hyperdeal/discussions/90.
Regards,
Alexander
On 03/02/2022 15:51, Peter Munch wrote:
Hi Alexander,
Nice that you found hyper.deal!
Since this seems to be more a hyper.deal related issue, I would suggest
to
discuss -- I happen to miss
this functionality too, but I've never come to a point where I can devote
enough time to this.
Best
Alexander
On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 10:37:08 AM UTC+2
sebastian...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thank you for the first answer!
>
> When I implement the comp
Hi Abbas
AMS requires the matrix to be (semi-)positive definite. The problem you
stated is not going to satisfy this if I understand it right.
Alexander
On Thursday, May 20, 2021 at 11:33:22 PM UTC+2 Abbas wrote:
> Thank you Sebestian,
>
> In case someone comes across this thre
David
what is the minimum number of procs this issue remains? Is it there for 2
procs?
Also, can you reduce the mesh to an absolute minimum, say 4-8 cells -- is
it still there?
Alexander
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 10:20:35 AM UTC+1 daschn...@googlemail.com
wrote:
> Hi Wolfg
David
i believe that in order to proceed, one will have to simplify this further.
What is the minimum number of processes this happens? Can you reproduce it
for 2 procs?
Additionally, can the mesh size be reduced to a minimum (ideally a handful
of cells, say 4-8)?
Alexander
On Monday
appreciate
it!
Alex
Jean-Paul Pelteret schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 um 22:13:04 UTC+2:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> I am, unfortunately, marginally acquainted with the problem that you’re
> facing. I’m not 100% sure, but I believe that this is an upstream problem
> that
allows
> your cmake to find all libraries.
>
> Unfortunately, recent updates to spack have made its functionality a bit
> clumsy in Mac OS...
>
> L.
>
> > On 28 Sep 2020, at 13:40, 'Alexander Greiner' via deal.II User Group <
> dea...@googleg
Not sure if this will help, but
>
> Have you enabled Full Disk Access for Terminal.app
>
> If not, can you enable it and try. See this
>
>
> https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2020/20200208_2004macOS-Catalina-add-fullDiskAccess-Terminal.html
>
> best
> praveen
>
&
LBACK_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/spack/lib
>
> I add this to my $HOME/.profile file.
>
> Best
> praveen
>
> On 28-Sep-2020, at 2:21 PM, 'Alexander Greiner' via deal.II User Group <
> dea...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> at least I could not
thout adapting all dynamic library files
manually? I've also attached the summary.log and detailed.log in case it
might be helpful.
Thank's a lot so far!
Regards
Alex
Wolfgang Bangerth schrieb am Montag, 28. September 2020 um 04:52:33 UTC+2:
> On 9/26/20 6:21 AM, 'Alexander Gr
t;> I would like to show you the spack build log, but I can't find that file.
>> Actually, spack does not really abort...just 'strange' things happen that I
>> do not understand. I'll attach the terminal output. In the end I have to
>> abort the proce
pen that I
do not understand. I'll attach the terminal output. In the end I have to
abort the process manually since (even after hours) nothing more than what
you can see in the terminal output happens.
Again I appreciate any help and ideas!
Alex
Alexander Greiner schrieb am Mittwoch, 23.
Hi,
I'm new here (and also relatively new to deal.II). I'm trying to install
dealii@9.2.0 from spack, running into errors. These errors are not directly
linked to deal.II and therefore I'm not sure if this is the right place to
post my problem. Unfortunately, clang@12.0.0 and Xcode12.0 seem to
for
ease automatically differentiating the metric terms?
Thank you for all the help,
Alex
On Thursday, July 9, 2020 at 11:54:12 AM UTC-4, Alexander Cicchino wrote:
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> As an update, I figured out a way to have it work in 3D without needing to
> use another Evaluate call.
:11:28 PM UTC-4, Alexander Cicchino wrote:
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> I would like to start by thanking you for all of your help. Here is a link
> to my fork: https://github.com/AlexanderCicchino/dealii
> It is not fully working yet, I need your help for the "evaluate" as you
>
epetitive if we use a single place.
>
> Best,
> Martin
> On 22.06.20 19:59, Alexander Cicchino wrote:
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> Thank you very much! I have been working on making the test case not
> depend on our in house flowsolver's functions.
> I think that implementing Eq
se the inverse
> Jacobian in deal.II does not yet pre-multiply with the determinant.
>
> Does that procedure sound reasonable to you? If yes, we could start
> putting together the ingredients. It would be good to have a mesh (the
> curvilinear case you were mentioning) where we c
uld be
> great. If you would be interested in this feature and trying to implement
> things, I'd be happy to guide you to the right places in the code.
>
> Best,
> Martin
> On 17.06.20 06:02, Alexander Cicchino wrote:
>
> Thank you for responding Wolfgang Bangerth.
>
>
n't satisfy free-stream preservation while the latter
("conservative curl form") does.
I will put together a unit test for a curvilinear grid.
Thank you,
Alex
On Tuesday, June 16, 2020 at 10:24:59 PM UTC-4, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
>
> Alexander,
>
> > I am
Hello,
I am wondering if anybody has also found that the inverse of the Jacobian
from FE Values, with MappingQGeneric does not satisfy the Geometric
Conservation Law (GCL), in the sense of:
Kopriva, David A. "Metric identities and the discontinuous spectral element
method on curvilinear meshes
I have a 2-rank symmetric tensor (SymmetricTensor), which is specified in
the spherical frame (phi, theta, r). I need to transform this to Cartesian
frame (I need to do this millions of times). Say my transformation matrix
is J.
What is the most efficient way to do that?
I suspect this might
Thanks, Daniel, looks appropriate!
On Friday, July 5, 2019 at 8:05:42 PM UTC+2, Daniel Arndt wrote:
>
> Alexander,
>
> have a look at
> https://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/classDataOut.html#afdefbb966f2053f4c4fc52293d2339ce
> .
> You just need to overlo
hin the existing interface?
Best
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"deal.II User Group&qu
myself in the next months (I
have to write funding proposals...)
Best
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog
Wolfgang,
indeed, this should be possible to do it that way. Would you mind putting
an example to the mentioned github issue? I might give it a thought in the
background if I see more details.
Best
Alexander
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:49:15 PM UTC+2, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> O
omain is a triangle, then that ratio is
> sqrt(2)=1.4!
>
Oh, I see... Fortunately, I have zero flux conditions at the sea/land
interface.
The domain boundaries have inhomogeneous Dirichlet BCs, but they are
straight anyway.
Thanks for your help. I will try this simple test and see how it
Wolfgang,
thanks, I'm inclined towards using FE_Nothing. Since this becomes quite
technical, I'm thinking of a following test. Can you please confirm if this
is a sensible way of validation.
(i) Construct a single cell quad mesh. Possibly refine n times.
(ii) At the top (arbitrary choice) bounda
e the solution effort by
constraining dofs inside domain #2 to zero?
Best
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google G
, what should I do on cells in domain #2? Logically, I should somehow
treat them with FE_Nothing... But how to get this done right?
Thanks!
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
You shouldn't use FE_Nedelec with non-standard meshes like hyper_ball. Try
FE_NedelecSZ instead. Read their docs for more information.
Best
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/deal
atrixFree, PreconditionMG) do not take a
spacedim argument. Since PreconditionMG itself does not support that, I am
not sure whether instantiating the rest for dim != spacedim even has a
point.
Best regards,
Alexander.
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/foru
ould I change this?
Best regards,
Alexander Knieps.
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"deal.II User
ordinate transformation, and there taking averages
> does not make any sense.”
>
> Best,
>
> L.
>
>
> > On 25 Apr 2017, at 13:42, Alexander Gary Zimmerman <
> zimmerma...@gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > When I refine a Triangulation
Luca, I finally got around to testing your fix, and now resize works as you
said it would :) Thanks! Of course it was really easy to do, but I had
moved on with another branch. Sorry for the delay.
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 4:47:58 PM UTC+1, Luca Heltai wrote:
>
> Resizing is fine. It is t
When I refine a Triangulation that has been initialized with
GridGenerator::hyper_ball, and has a SphericalManifold attached (and having
set_all_manifold_ids on the Triangulation), some nan (not a number) values
are produced.
On the other hand, I get the expected behavior when instead using a
It looks like I might have left a loose end here. JP indeed answered my
question :) Thanks for all of the help.
On Friday, April 7, 2017 at 9:52:21 PM UTC+2, Timo Heister wrote:
>
> > Just post a question/request and hope for the best ;-) I'm pretty sure
> that
> > Timo will read this at some p
it's quite difficult to
justify this time spending at this stage. But I hope to be able to do it
one day.
Best,
Alexander
Am Dienstag, 11. Oktober 2016 10:33:01 UTC+2 schrieb Konstantin Ladutenko:
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> I added a short description of your paper to
> https:/
I.
Best,
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"deal.II User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from t
step-17 will
more likely see it there than go into details of this thread.
Best,
Alexander
Am Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2016 20:10:09 UTC+2 schrieb shanglong zhang:
>
> Alexander,
>
> I run step-8 and the system matrix is symmetry at least for the first
> cycle. I attach the output tx
Shanglong,
I'm not an expert in this field, but I assume it should be.
Can you please check if system matrix in step-8 (which was used to
implement step-17) is symmetric?
Alexander
Am Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2016 15:58:42 UTC+2 schrieb shanglong zhang:
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> T
3
(5,5) 1.3
(6,0) -0.67
See, there is no (0, 6) and symmetry is violated.
The matrix is still positive-definite, that is probably why CG still gets
something out of it.
Alexander
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
> deal.II 8.4.0
> petsc 3.3.0.3
> MUMPS 4.10.0-p3
>
This PETSc and MUMPS > 4 years old. Update to the latest versions and try
again. If problem persists, provide the relevant snippet of the code.
> Sorry, I am not familiar with the petsc library. You meant if I call
> *solver.solve(system_m
>
>
> I modify the step-17 so that it uses PETScWrappers::SparseDirectMUMPS as
> solver. However, when I active the option of set_symmetric_mode, the
> solution has discrepancy from CG or MUMPS without the symmetry option. (The
> solutions from CG and MUMPS without symmetry option are identical
61 matches
Mail list logo
