[deal.II] Re: deal.II Compact Course - 09--13 April 2018, Heidelberg, Germany

Yaakov, does such a course start in every semester (SS/WS)？ > No, it takes place annually. Best, Daniel -- 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

[deal.II] Re: error running after update

Jane, this looks like you are using a compiler (clang on macOS?) that doesn't define std::auto_ptr anymore and the used boost library doesn't detect this. A recent developer version (there will soon be a release) should circumvent the problem. How did you install deal.II? Are you using spack

[deal.II] Re: Unable to find function definition of GridTools::exchange_cell_data_to_ghosts

Pratik, I dont know how feasible it would be, but maybe you could move it to > grid_tools.cc . It seems that even doxygen > > does not pick up the source code as it does for all the other functions. > The reason why this

[deal.II] Re: Unable to find function definition of GridTools::exchange_cell_data_to_ghosts

Pratik, I was looking for how the function GridTools::exchange_cell_data_to_ghosts > works. I can find the function declaration here > > > (line 2392). But I cannot seem to find

[deal.II] Re: manifold for multiple circles on 2D plane

Weixiong, The initial description might be misleading. What I tried to do is > repeatedly set manifolds for circles on X-Y plane. Now I use STL container > to contain different pointers of SphericalManifold instance and > correspondingly assign distinct manifold ids, it worked out. But it

[deal.II] Re: manifold for multiple circles on 2D plane

Weixiong, [...] > In 3D, I use CylindricalManifold<3> with axis=2 for the fold type. Yet, I > just realize being stuck in 2D that axis=2 is not available for > CylindricalManifold<2> ( 0 or 1 cannot give me the z-oriented cylinder ). > What is it you are trying to achieve? We identify the first

[deal.II] Re: use of "meshworker" for FESystem

Jaekwang, do you have a minimal compilign example that shows the problem? Did you call dof_handler.distribute_dofs(fe)? Best, Daniel -- 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

Re: [deal.II] p4est critical number of elements in each Proc

Qing, MeshSmoothingyou are using Triangulation::MeshSmoothing(Triangulation::smoothing_on_refinement) which might result in no cells being refined at all. This is why you get an inifinite loop. Removing the mesh smoothing should avoid this issue. Another problem might be that

[deal.II] Re: undefined reference link error of refinement under parallel framework

Qing, parallel::diistributed::Triangulation doesn't support dim==1. Therefore, parallel::distributed::GridRefinement::refine_and_coarsen_fixed_number is not instantiated for this case indeed. If you want to do computations in 1d, you have to use the regular (serial) Triangulation class or the

[deal.II] Re: GridTools::collect_periodic_faces has problem with meshes generated by Gmsh or Abaqus when running in parallel.

Hamed, for collecting the periodic boundary pairs only the coarsest level is important. In particular, you have to make sure that you set the boundary indicators correctly for all cells on this level. For the coarsest level every MPI process knows about all the cells since the mesh is the

[deal.II] deal.II Compact Course - 09--13 April 2018, Heidelberg, Germany

information see the corresponding homepage <http://www.mathsim.eu/~darndt/index.php?section=index=compact-course-dealii> . <http://indico.sissa.it/e/sixth-dealii-workshop> Best regards, Daniel Arndt -- Daniel Arndt Interdisciplinary Center for Scientific Computing (IWR) Im Neuenhei

[deal.II] Re: assertion failed: be_value_from_constant: unknown constant kind (shared/cfe/edgglue/edg_decl.c, line 1374)

Lev, https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/5833 provides a workaround for this issue. Best regards, Daniel Am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 22:23:22 UTC+1 schrieb Lev Karatun: > > Hi everyone, > > I was trying to update dealII to the latest version, but I'm getting an > error: > >> [ 47%]

[deal.II] Re: Hanging node constraints and periodic constraints together causing an issue

Sambit, Please try if https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/5779 fixes the issue for you. Best, Daniel Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2018 22:06:55 UTC+1 schrieb Sambit Das: > > Thank you, Dr. Arndt. > > Best, > Sambit > > On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 11:16:08 AM UTC-

[deal.II] Re: the viscous term in SUPG stabilization terms

Feimi, u^h \cdot grad{w^h} \cdot laplacian{u^h} for SUPG and > grad{q^h} \cdot laplacian{u^h} for PSPG. > > Where u^h is the trial function and w^h, q^h refer to the velocity and > pressure test function, respectively. > It seems impossible to calculate these terms with linear elements

[deal.II] Re: Hanging node constraints and periodic constraints together causing an issue

Sambit, I created an issue at https://github.com/dealii/dealii/issues/5741 with a modified version of your example. Best, Daniel -- 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

Re: [deal.II] Looking for more info on FE_RaviartThomas

Praveen, > Also, is it possible to get this notes that Guido has posted > > http://www.mathsim.eu/~gkanscha/notes/mixed.pdf > > > which seems to be inaccessible

[deal.II] Re: candi deal.ii

Peimeng, adding to what Uwe said, you don't need to a fortran compiler to build PETSc. In particular, you can try to also set `--with-fc=0` in deal.II-toolchain/packages/petsc.package CONFOPTS. Best, Daniel -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum

Re: [deal.II] Re: DoFTools::make_hanging_node_constraints affecting DoFTools::make_periodicity_constraints for a single element triangulation with no hanging nodes

Sambit, just for confirmation: the first problem with your test is that calling the constructor FE_Q with a (one-dimensional) Quadrature formula requires the first point to be 0 and the last one 1 as described in the documentation.

[deal.II] Re: Moving vertices of parallel triangulation breaks periodic face pair match

Sambit, It turned out that there was indeed a bug in `parallel::distributed::Triangulation::communicate_locally_moved_vertices` in that we didn't update vertices across periodic faces correctly. PR #5612 Since you provided the major part of the

[deal.II] Re: Handling Dirichlet Boundary conditions with Hanging Nodes

Phani, > I have a general query. Is there anything I should be particularly careful > when I have to handle non-homogenous dirichlet boundary on a mesh with > hanging nodes on the boundary? I am working in the matrix-free data > structure format. I am trying to impose non-homogenous boundary

Re: [deal.II] Re: mapping_collection and step-27

Juan, take a look at the documentation of that function. It tells you that the last parameter needs to be "false", i.e. this function is only implemented for the case in which you

[deal.II] Re: Seg fault using Extracting hanging node dofs in MPI

Phani, apparently no one used this function for a parallel::distributed::Triangulation before. The problem is that we don't know about DoFs on artficial cells. The pull request https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/5604 fixes this issue by extracting DoFs belonging to locally owned cells.

[deal.II] Re: Moving vertices of parallel triangulation breaks periodic face pair match

Sambit, your minimal example fails, because you are calling GridTools::collect_periodic_faces(triangulation, /*b_id1*/ 2*i+1, /*b_id2*/ 2*i+2,/*direction*/ i, periodicity_vector); after triangulation.refine_global(2); again. As explained in the documentation

[deal.II] Re: Using FunctionMap for nonzero normal flux (eg in step-22)

Jane, I'm wondering whether I've misunderstood how to use the FunctionMap > declaration. I'm needing it to use for > VectorTools::compute_nonzero_normal_flux_constraints > > At the moment I am trying to apply nonzero normal component of the normal > stress in step-22 on a boundary id that is

[deal.II] Re: Moving vertices of parallel triangulation breaks periodic face pair match

Sambit, I am trying to move all parallel triangulation nodes by a constant > displacement, but that breaks the periodic face pairs match when I > call GridTools::collect_periodic_faces(...). I use the following code for > the mesh movement. The dftPtr->triangulation has periodicity constraints

[deal.II] Re: how to refine only the outer cells of a mesh?

Alex, have a look at step-1 . The relevant piece of code there looks like Triangulation<2>::active_cell_iterator cell = triangulation.begin_active

[deal.II] Re: time dependent problem with time dependent dirichlet boundary conditions

Bhanu, [...] > VectorTools::interpolate_boundary_values(move_dof_handler, 106, > move_boundary_values_function, move_boundary_values); > MatrixTools::apply_boundary_values(move_boundary_values, > move_system_matrix, move_solution, move_system_rhs); > > instead of 'constraints'. >

[deal.II] Re: Boost errors

Praveen, can you provide us with a minimal example showing the problem? Since this problem doesn't appear when compiling the library, it is difficult to guess the cause. Best, Daniel > -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum options, see

Re: [deal.II] Test 4 failed, maybe different installation of MPI? then how to solve this?

Michael, are actually compiling with a MPI compiler? Does replacing NULL by nullptr help? Best, Daniel Am Samstag, 28. Oktober 2017 01:52:24 UTC+2 schrieb Michael: > > Thanks for your reply. I did install mpich_3.2-7_amd64.deb before. When I > tried your simple mpi example, I can not even

[deal.II] Re: Installation error, please help, thx!

Michael, can you just provide us with the full make output when starting from a clean build directory? Best, Daniel -- 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

[deal.II] Re: mapping_collection and step-27

Juan [...] > >static std::map bval; > VectorTools::interpolate_boundary_values (mapping_collection, > dof_handler, ZeroFunction(), bval); > > and I get the following error: > > [100%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/pFEM.dir/pFEM.cc.o >

[deal.II] Re: Signal: Segmentation fault in parallel::distributed::Triangulation

Yiayng, Am Freitag, 20. Oktober 2017 01:42:09 UTC+2 schrieb Yiyang Zhang: > > Hello Daniel, > > I am using the following code on my macbook. > > mpirun -n 1 xterm -e lldb ./test : -n 1 ./test > So you are running into the error with only one MPI process as well? Then, you should be able to omit

[deal.II] Re: Signal: Segmentation fault in parallel::distributed::Triangulation

Yiyang, what do you see if you run this in a debugger on a interactive node, i.e. something like mpiexec -np 2 xterm -e gdb ./your_program ? Since this is a segmentation fault I would expect that you should be able to find the exact failing statement this way without too much problems. I have

[deal.II] Re: Block problem +MatrixFree

Michael, I implemented something similar to what you proposed. You might want to have a look at https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/5175 Best, Daniel Am Mittwoch, 27. September 2017 17:41:08 UTC+2 schrieb Michał Wichrowski: > > >> I've started working on new version MGTransferBlockMatrixFree

[deal.II] Re: Block problem +MatrixFree

Michael, Adding to Wolfgang's response: Am Dienstag, 26. September 2017 17:42:41 UTC+2 schrieb Michał Wichrowski: > > Dear all, > I'm dealing with Stokes problem that I want to solve using matrix-free > methods. In tests I've alredy found implementation of Stokes operator that > uses block

Re: [deal.II] Re: about deal.II with CUDA C programming acceleration

Chih-Che, [...] > Build FAST version in /work2/chueh/deal.II_project/p4est/p4est-build/FAST > configure: WARNING: Static source code checker splint not found > configure: WARNING: Static source code checker splint not found > FAST version installed in /work2/chueh/deal.II_project/p4est/FAST > >

[deal.II] Re: Solving space-dependent equations using dealII?

Maxi, Is it possible to solve not only time-, but also space-dependent equations > in dealII? As example the nonlinear schrödinger equation: > \partial_z U = i(\partial_x^2+\partial_y^2) U > with U=U(x, y, z) and U_0=U(x, y, 0)? As far as I know until now, all the > equations are based on time,

[deal.II] Re: Usage of the laplace-matrix in example 23

Maxi, citing from the documentation of step-23[1]: "In a very similar vein, we are also too lazy to write the code to assemble mass and Laplace matrices, although it would have only taken copying the relevant code from any number of previous tutorial programs. Rather, we want to focus on the

Re: [deal.II] Can someone send me an offline documentation of dealii？

Alternatively, you can also build the documentation yourself using the instructions at https://www.dealii.org/developer/readme.html#documentation Best, Daniel -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum options, see

[deal.II] Re: Modification of example 33 correct, or not?

Maxi, can you clarify which of the variables and coefficients are vector-valued and which a scalar-valued? Do all your \cdot relate to scalar products? Can you write down \nabla \cdot (k_N\cdot N) in components? Assuming that N, T_E and T_L are scalar, (k_N\cdot N) should be vector-valued for

[deal.II] Re: define 2D/3D Point

Lisa, you can write something like Point p; switch(dim) { case 1: p = Point (1); break; case 2: p = Point (1, 2); break; case 3: p = Point (1, 2, 3); break; default: Assert(false, ExcNotImplemented()); } const Point test_point = p; Best, Daniel -- The

[deal.II] Re: hp HDG in deal.II

Samuel, Thanks for your answer, your approach actually worked quite well. > Thanks! > (How would I go about submitting a patch? I have absolutely no experience > with these things) > Have a look the FAQ [1]. If you have problems doing this, we happily help. > Now I have another question.

[deal.II] Re: About applying periodic boundary condition on the same mesh by different methods

Chuyi, I still have a question about how to apply periodic boundary conditons: Is > there any possibility now to apply PBC with a value 1.0 in x_component and > y_component while -1.0 in z_component? I've read an older version of > step-45 before (like 8.3.0), which showed we could change that

[deal.II] Re: project or interpolate initial condition on PetscWrappers::MPI::Vector

Marek, > InitialValuePhase ()solution_phase_n > > solution_phase_n.reinit (locally_owned_dofs_phase, > locally_relevant_dofs_phase, > MPI_COMM_WORLD); > > TrilinosWrappers::Vector vec_old_solution (dof_handler_phase.n_dofs > ()); > >

[deal.II] Re: Any easy how-to: petsc and solver preconditioner selection from input?

Weixiong, Am Samstag, 10. Juni 2017 12:54:50 UTC+2 schrieb Weixiong Zheng: > > Hi all, > > I am developing something based on petsc solvers and preconditioners. We > actually expect to invoke user-requested solvers and preconditioners from > the input file. > > I saw selector classes for

[deal.II] Re: get_function_value error with hp class

Weixiong, [...] > Then I got confused: > 1. I used hp class a year ago or so, fv.get_function_values works > directly. Now I have to use the above change. Did I do something wrong? > 2. Then why fv.shape_value still works as it did? Isn't fv still a > FESystem object? > How did you initialize

[deal.II] Re: About applying periodic boundary condition on the same mesh by different methods

Chuyi, > i was trying to use Dealii to solve a 3-dimensional elastic-plastic > question on a cubic by applying periodic boundary condition like in step-45 > (v. 8.5.0). > std::vector cell_iterator> > periodicity_vector; >

Re: [deal.II] Re: Step 13 & 14 -- Different BCs on different boundary indicators

Dear Elena, I want to do something like below code, but I don't know how to write it > correctly: > > template > void > Solver::*assemble_linear_system *(LinearSystem _system) > { > > VectorTools::interpolate_boundary_values (dof_handler, >

[deal.II] Re: Step-42

Benhour, `make run` gives me: Scanning dependencies of target step-42 [ 33%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/step-42.dir/step-42.cc.o [ 66%] Linking CXX executable step-42 [ 66%] Built target step-42 Scanning dependencies of target run [100%] Run step-42 with Debug configuration *** Call this

[deal.II] Re: Adding periodicity to a thin sample with one element in thickness direction

Hamed, > To the best of my knowledge, GridGenerator::subdivided_hyper_rectangle >> generates a coarsest level mesh (i.e. all cells have level = 0) with the >> given discretisation in each coordinate direction. >> > > It seems that GridGenerator::subdivided_hyper_rectangle needs repetition >

[deal.II] Re: Step-42

Ben, I really appreciate it if you let me know how I can run step 42 because > whenever I ran it, I got two error without any information about that. This > is exactly the same with "goal oriented mesh adaptivity in elastoplasticity > proiblems" example which is written by Shahram. Looking

[deal.II] Re: Crack propagation

Jack, have a look at https://github.com/tjhei/cracks Best, Daniel Am Freitag, 12. Mai 2017 07:57:06 UTC+2 schrieb Jack: > > Hi S. A. Mohseni, > > I'm also interested on the cracking mechanics, where is such an example > for crack propagation ? > > Thanks ! > > 在 2017年3月30日星期四

[deal.II] Re: method/function from Triangulation class that returns a vertex

Bhanu, Am Donnerstag, 11. Mai 2017 12:08:52 UTC+2 schrieb Bhanu Teja: > > Dear dealii developers/users > > is there a method/function from Triangulation class that returns the > vertex given its global_index? > There is "Triangulation::get_vertices"[1] which returns a

Re: [deal.II] fixing one component of solution to the same value

Rajat, It seems that I confused lines and did not express in the code what I wrote above: You have to add that additional index also when initializing the sparsity pattern, i.e. std::cout << " constraints printed " <

Re: [deal.II] fixing one component of solution to the same value

Rajat, What is happening here is that you try to create constraints that include DoFs that are not element of the IndexSet you provided to the DynamicSparsityPattern object. Therefore, all the entries for your "fixed" DoF are ignored if it is not already part of the locally relevant DoFs. Have

Re: [deal.II] Re: imposing boundary conditions for a three-fields formulation

Alberto, Now I understand your concern. The boolean flag that is passed as the final > parameter to MatrixTools::apply_boundary_values > > > determines whether column elimination is

[deal.II] Re: QProjector::project_to_face and Gauss Lobatto

vganpat, I am trying to solve a problem that has both the volume integral and a > surface integral. > You would normally just create a quadrature rule for the volume and the surface integral separately. > If I am using a higher order polynomial approximation and use Gauss > Lobatto

Re: [deal.II] Re: Meshworker in dim=2, spacedim = 3

Andrea, This should be fixed upstream now. Have a look at PR #4265 [1]. Best, Daniel [1] https://github.com/dealii/dealii/pull/4265 -- 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

[deal.II] Re: Unable to download dealii-8.4.1 for Mac

Ana, I can't confirm your problem. Downloading works without issues. What browser are you using? Do you get any warnings? Best, Daniel Am Samstag, 8. April 2017 16:39:34 UTC+2 schrieb Ana Marija: > > Hi, > > For a few days I am unable to download installation for MAC, it always > fails around

[deal.II] Re: Finite Element Method for Two Phase Flow

Sumedh, In my project I am modeling two-phase flow using phase-field model (an > interface capturing method). Now I am done with first draft of my code and > I am facing the well-known issue of 'spurious currents in two-phase flow > using FEM' (paper 1 >

[deal.II] Re: Inhomogeneous Dirichlet bounday conditions with Raviart-Thomas (RT) elements

Sumedh, I intend to use RT elements for my fluid flow problem and the test case > (2D) is shear flow. Consequently the I need to apply constant shear/sliding > velocity (u_x = shear_velocity, u_y = 0) at top and bottom boundaries and > velocities of form u_y = 0, u_x = y*shear_velocity for the

[deal.II] Re: fe_enriched and step-47

David, > Hopefully someone get to finish step-47 with XFEM. I am really interested > in digging there and I put it on my own TODO list. > I don't know if Wolfgang, the author of the tutorial, plan to finish it. > Maybe we can team up here. > step-47 seems to be completed in the paper On the

[deal.II] Re: Avoid holding matrices in vector for MeshWorker

Franco, You are right that there is no matrix assembler class that accepts an AnyData object. I have seen that MeshWorker with the MatrixSimple assembler has an > initialize member that needs a vector of matrices. However that isn't > really good for my case, as I'd like to assign ownership

[deal.II] Re: New: step-57

Jack, Is it possible to extend your code to time dependent Navier-Stokes >> equations? >> >> I want to solve the unsteady Navier-Stokes equations using the >> *Vector-Valued* method, but I did not get any good idea from the >> tutorial examples (step-22, step-32, etc.) for Stokes flow. >> >

[deal.II] Re: How to compute Nédélec gradient

> Unfortunately, visualizing is not enough to my purposes. I need the > tangential component of the gradient at the mesh faces to perform a > post-processing phase where I compute some relevant quantities to be used > later in solving a different problem. > In general, you can create a

[deal.II] Re: How to compute Nédélec gradient

I'm solving a 2D problem on quadrilateral cartesian mesh using FE_Q(1) > elements. > I would like to compute the gradient of the bilinear solution, known to > belong to the FE_Nedelec(0) space: how can I manage to do it? > For visualizing the gradient of discrete solution, you have multiple

[deal.II] Re: MeshWorker clarifications

Franco, on the first glance your code looks good. Can you reduce the size of your problem to a single cell? Is there still a difference then? Best, Daniel Am Mittwoch, 8. März 2017 13:04:01 UTC+1 schrieb Franco Milicchio: > > I have made available the snippet for this example here >

[deal.II] Re: Access specific element within a distributed triangulation

Seyed, after having just a quick glance over your approach there seem to be some more issues you can easily stumble upon: - n_vertices() only gives you the number of vertices for one process, not the global one. In particular, you can't rely on the fact that this is the same for all processes.

[deal.II] Re: MeshWorker clarifications

Franco, First of all, I have read this question > , > > and I read that MeshWorker is sort of abandoned: > > the issue with MeshWorker is that when it was implemented, we didn't

[deal.II] Re: Question regarding P:D:Tria

Rajat, I am using the GridGenerator::hyper_rectangle function to create a > rectangular grid with 1000 X 500 X 1 (0.5 million) elements. > > My question is: - since the coarsest mesh contains 0.5 million elements, > does that mean all the processors have 0.5 million elements? > (I think the

[deal.II] Re: Access specific element within a distributed triangulation

Seyed, > But is it necessary to #include ? > Since deal.II won't recognize functions such as MPI_Comm_rank > (MPI_COMM_WORLD, > ) for instance or MPI_Reduce. > Is it implemented in Utilities::MPI::something ? > If you are using a

[deal.II] Re: Access specific element within a distributed triangulation

Seyed, What I understood so far is, that the Utilities::MPI::max() function > computes the maximum between all processors for each row of my vector. This > means if I have a vector of 20 entries, each entry has 8 values distributed > on 8 cores for instance. As a result, I get 20 maximum

[deal.II] Re: Matrix tools in MatrixCreator namespace

Sumedh, I want to use the *create_mass_matrix* and *create_laplace_matrix* > functionality of MatrixCreator namespace. The function prototype here > requires to pass a pointer (which is by default 0 meaning that there is no > variable coefficient associated with variable or laplace of

[deal.II] Re: neighboring faces on the boundary

> > We actually already have a function that can do 1/2 the job for you, > namely GridTools:: compute_active_cell_halo_layer > . > > In this instance your predicate would be whether the

[deal.II] Re: Synchronization issue for parallel computation of material forces

Seyed, your results look like the ghost values are wrong. My first guess would be that you are still using a completely distributed vector (one initialized with locally_owned_dofs only) instead of a ghosted one (initialized with locally_owned_dofs and locally_relevant_dofs). Can you confirm

Re: [deal.II] Re: How to shift a ConstraintMatrix that initialized with IndexSet?

Ce Qin, This finally made its way into the developer version via PR #3722 . The approach we finally came up with is to also shift the local indices when shifting the ConstraintMatrix objects.[1] Merging two ConstraintMatrix objects also merges the

[deal.II] Re: Source of a constant residual error when a triangulation has hanging nodes

Pasha, I have a code that works fine. Now, I am working to change the code > structure to use “workstream”. The new code works fine without adaptive > refinement. However, when the mesh is refined and the triangulation has > hanging node, a constant residual error remains during Newton

[deal.II] Re: Assembly of material forces

Seyed, What exactly are you trying to do? Which equations are you considering? How would what you want to do look in formulas? The information you provide are much too high-level to expect a useful answer. [...] > Conclusion: It would be great, if you can at least guide me to the correct >

[deal.II] Re: Postprocessing using the same variable twice

> > Is it possible to output the magnitude of displacements and its components > all together? > > std::vector > data_component_interpretation(dim, DataComponentInterpretation:: > component_is_part_of_vector); > > The above allows me to output the displacements as a vector field and > shows

[deal.II] Re: How to use Triangulation::communicate_locally_moved_vertices() to get a consistent mesh

Pasha, [...] > It works fine when using one CPU, however, the mesh is not consistent for > a parallel run with more CPUs. How and where I can use > Triangulation::communicate_locally_moved_vertices() to solve this issue? > You would use Triangulation::communicate_locally_moved_vertices [1]

[deal.II] Re: Strain tensor and displacement gradients

> > [...] > This means everything we do in DataPostprocessor is evaluated directly in > the mapped Gauss points which is actually the reason why we use this > postprocessor approach. We want to map the solution of quantities stored on > the Gauss points to the physical nodes, so we can

[deal.II] Re: Strain tensor and displacement gradients

> > Using the postprocessor approach according to step-33 I have computed the > strain tensor successfully by means of the > Postprocessor::compute_derived_quantities_vector function and its > displacement gradient duh. > > Unfortunately, within an arbitrary function called right after I solve

[deal.II] Re: Tensor Output

Ehsan, In my code first I calculate displacements (uh) then in each cell at the > q_points I calculate S_xx, S_xy, S_yy stress components and project them to > the nodes and with a averaging method calculate stress nodal values. > > Now I want to calculate stress components in polar

[deal.II] Re: Tensor Output

Ehsan, 1- As far as I tested and understood, when we write data_out.add_data_vector > (solver.solution, Ur); we pass a solution vector which has > dof_handler.n_dofs() members to add_data_vector and then inside > compute_derived_quantities_vector method when I print uh the values > relate to

[deal.II] Re: Periodic Boundary Condition

Hamed, [...] > However, to be able to use ConstraintMatrix::distribute_local_to_global, I > can assemble system_matrix in local level instead of global level. Having > that said, I can not do so for the system_rhs because solution and > old_solution vectors are global vectors. > You can

Re: [deal.II] Re: How to shift a ConstraintMatrix that initialized with IndexSet?

Thank you for pointing out this problem. I'll create a PR. Best, Daniel Am Dienstag, 3. Januar 2017 04:07:44 UTC+1 schrieb Ce Qin: > > Dear Daniel, > > It works now. I made a mistake before. Thank you for your help. > > Best, > Ce Qin > > 2017-01-02 23:35 GMT+08:00 Da

Re: [deal.II] Re: How to shift a ConstraintMatrix that initialized with IndexSet?

Ce Qin, Removing the assertion works, but it will cause a problem. Since the > ConstraintMatrix internally uses local_lines to determine the position of > a ConstraintLine, we can not insert new line or query an existing line > anymore. > The attached examples works for me as far as I can

Re: [deal.II] Re: How to shift a ConstraintMatrix that initialized with IndexSet?

Ce Qin, I don't immediately see a reason why shifting local_lines in ConstraintMatrix::shift should cause problems as long as the IndexSet you initialize the ConstraintMatrix objects with accounts for all DoFs. What happens if you just remove that assertion? Best, Daniel -- The deal.II

[deal.II] Re: How to shift a ConstraintMatrix that initialized with IndexSet?

Ce Qin, Am Freitag, 30. Dezember 2016 02:46:05 UTC+1 schrieb Ce Qin: > > Dear all, > > I want to build a 2x2 block matrix, while all blocks are built from a > smaller DoFHandler. I need to generate 2 ConstraintMatrix and shift one > of them, then merge them together. In the source code, Timo

[deal.II] Re: deal.II FE structure

> > For a rectangular bilinear lagrange element we define two parameters "a" > and "b". They define the width b and height a of the rectangle within > physical coordinates. The Jacobian matrix, B-operator, stiffness matrix > etc. can all be computed then using this special case formulas. 1 and

[deal.II] Re: Tensor output via ConditionalOStream pcout

Dear S.A. Mohseni, There is no need to duplicate code. ;-) FullMatrix also has a print function[1] and its implementation[2] is more or less identical to what you are doing. Best, Daniel [1] https://www.dealii.org/8.4.1/doxygen/deal.II/classFullMatrix.html#a6427bd9b23b03c590b9881c7dc551552

[deal.II] Re: Tensor output via ConditionalOStream pcout

Dear S. A. Mohseni, I found these definitions within symmetric_tensor.h. How can I access them? > They seem to allow output for my case. > [...] > You would just use the << operator, i.e. pcout << tensor Best, Daniel -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing

[deal.II] Re: what to do with Neumann term in week formulation when applying Periodic Boundary Condition

Hamed, Let consider a situation when we don't want to apply Neumann BC at all, > namely, we do not want to eliminate the Neumann term, (v, n.grad(u)), > considering zero value for that or we do not have a known g function to > consider (v, n.grad(u))=g. In this case, how we can include the

[deal.II] Re: How to apply non-homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions when we do not have exact solution

Hamed, What you are doing in your code resembles something similar to a Picard iteration step for the term (v, n\cdot\nabla u) Neumann boundary values mean that you want to enforce n\cdot\nabla u=g on the boundary where g is known. Typically, you do this in a finite element approach in a weak

[deal.II] Re: Distorted cell when it is crated by gmsh

Kyusik, [...] > Additional Information: > The input data for creating a triangulation contained information about a > line with indices 272 and 100that is supposed to have boundary indicator . > However, this is an internal line not located on the boundary. You cannot > assign a boundary

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

Anup, Looking at the resulting mesh after using grid_y_transform, the mesh is still rectangular. Therefore, it is not surprising that make_periodicity_constraints works without offset, but not with: Tensor<1, dim> offset; offset[dim-1] = width*tan_theta*scale;

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

s from a .prm file. > > Thanks, > Anup. > > On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 9:52:40 AM UTC-6, Anup Basak wrote: >> >> Hello Daniel, >> >> Thanks for your reply and help. I am attaching a part of the code >> herewith. >> >> Thanks and regards, >

[deal.II] Re: problem in periodic boundary condition

Anup, I am trying to implement the periodic boundary condition for a nonlinear > parabolic equation (scalar). > I have considered a *parallelepiped *as shown in the attached pdf. I want > to impose periodic > BC at x=0 and x=w surfaces. I have used an offset vector as appearing in > the piece

[deal.II] Re: Problems with hanging nodes and "distribute_local_to_global"

Heinrich, The way constraints are resolved in deal.II is as follows (related to *M. S. Shephard: Linear multipoint constraints applied via transformation as part of a direct stiffness assembly process. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engrg., vol. 20 (1984), pp. 2107-2112.*): You have a linear system Ax=b

[deal.II] Re: Meshworker

Sudarshan, When I am at the face I need the solution at the interior quadrature > points as well. However from dinfo1.indices we could get the the dof > indices for the cell1. But is it possible to get the shape value at the > interior quadrature points ? > You can of course work

<    1   2   3   4   5   >