Re: [deal.II] Re: Coarse Cell IDs Distributed Triangulation

Amazing. Thank you very much! Jonathan On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 4:33:47 PM UTC-5 Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > On 11/11/21 1:08 PM, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > Does the same cell in the bottom left corner of the domain have exactly > > the same CellId as the CellId it had wh

[deal.II] Re: Coarse Cell IDs Distributed Triangulation

lii.org/current/doxygen/deal.II/classCellAccessor.html#aee7d5ec9cac8af95a136554501ea4f0a> > . > > Hope this helps, > Marc > > On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 6:30:30 AM UTC-7 Jonathan Russ wrote: > >> Hello - >> >> I really would like to have a unique

[deal.II] Coarse Cell IDs Distributed Triangulation

Hello - I really would like to have a unique ID for each coarse cell regardless of the number of MPI processes. I have a distributed (not fullydistributed) triangulation. Testing the coarse_cell->index

Re: [deal.II] Extract constant modes slow

: > > On 1/24/20 11:37 AM, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > > > Thank you for your reply, however, I just seemed to have solved my > > problem. I had a block system with one vector valued field and one > > scalar valued field. When I extract the constant modes for the vector &g

Re: [deal.II] Extract constant modes slow

taking your time. Jonathan On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > On 1/23/20 5:00 PM, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > > > I noticed that the Trilinos ML preconditioner accessed through the > > TrilinosWrappers benefits heavily from supplyi

[deal.II] Extract constant modes slow

Hello - I noticed that the Trilinos ML preconditioner accessed through the TrilinosWrappers benefits heavily from supplying the constant modes or the null-space of the laplace operator. Using the extract_constant_modes functionality I notice that this can take quite a bit of time for a vector

Re: [deal.II] Iterative Linear Solver Tolerance

Professor Bangerth - Thank you very much for your very helpful reply! I was thinking that the addition of large vector of numbers at or below machine precision would accumulate a lot of numerical roundoff error but I see what you mean. The Eisenstat Walker algorithm looks like exactly what I wa

[deal.II] Iterative Linear Solver Tolerance

Hello - I have a simple question I was hoping to get advice on related to setting the linear solver tolerance for an iterative solver. In the tutorial examples (and in most of the codes I have seen and written) the solver tolerance is some fraction of the initial right hand side 2-norm (e.g. to

Re: [deal.II] Re: Serendipity elements

Professor Bangerth - Okay thank you for your advice! I'll take a look at the FE_Poly class as you suggest. Thanks again, Jonathan On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 9:14 PM Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > On 8/4/19 5:47 PM, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > > > Thank you for your reply. The sh

Re: [deal.II] Re: Serendipity elements

s requires a significant amount of additional effort? Thank you again, Jonathan On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 3:58:07 PM UTC-6, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > On 8/3/19 1:17 PM, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > > > How difficult would it be to add serendipity elements to dealii? They

[deal.II] Re: Serendipity elements

Hello - How difficult would it be to add serendipity elements to dealii? They are very useful in solid mechanics applications and can greatly reduce the computational cost. Is it very difficult to add an element that is the same is FE_Q but without the few extra basis functions when quadratic

[deal.II] Re: Output global variable such as "time"

Perfect! Thank you so much! On Saturday, April 20, 2019 at 9:31:51 PM UTC-4, Daniel Arndt wrote: > > Jonathan, > > have a look at DataOutBase::write_pvd_record() ( > https://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/namespaceDataOutBase.html#a6f1c052ba49fd44cd8e3f35ba871aebd > ). > > Best, > Daniel

[deal.II] Output global variable such as "time"

Hello - Is it possible to output a "global variable" such as time to, say, the paraview output files so that I can easily see at what solution time the current output data corresponds to? I only see the ability to output vectors of data that correspond to either the number of nodes or elements

[deal.II] Re: Saving distributed vector and FullMatrix to binary files

Professor Bangerth - Thank you for your reply. I may try this but I also plan to look into HDF5 to see if that might be effective. Thank you again! Jonathan On Friday, October 19, 2018 at 1:20:37 PM UTC-4, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > Good afternoon - > > I am implementing an algorith

[deal.II] Saving distributed vector and FullMatrix to binary files

Good afternoon - I am implementing an algorithm in which I need to save some data and the distributed solution vector at each time increment for later use. Since this is potentially a lot of data that I cannot store in available memory I would like to be able to write this data out to binary fi

Re: [deal.II] FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

gt; mass matrix can be made diagonal by choosing basis functions that are not > either zero or one at the vertices of the cell, but instead are zero or one > at a given set of quadrature points. > > > J-P > > On 07 Mar 2018, at 18:09, Jonathan Russ > > wrote: > &g

Re: [deal.II] Re: FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

rch 7, 2018 at 11:04:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Turcksin wrote: > > Jonathan, > > 2018-03-07 10:43 GMT-05:00 Jonathan Russ >: > >> >> Thank you for your fast reply. I'm sorry I'm not doing a great job of >> explaining this. Here is an example from elasticity that

[deal.II] Re: FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

es of freedom. On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 10:46:12 AM UTC-5, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > Some people refer to this as an element with internal nodes. > > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 10:43:13 AM UTC-5, Jonathan Russ wrote: >> >> Hi Bruno - >> >> Thank y

[deal.II] Re: FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

Some people refer to this as an element with internal nodes. On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 10:43:13 AM UTC-5, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > Hi Bruno - > > Thank you for your fast reply. I'm sorry I'm not doing a great job of > explaining this. Here is an example from elastic

[deal.II] Re: FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 10:30:44 AM UTC-5, Bruno Turcksin wrote: > > Jonathan, > > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 10:20:44 AM UTC-5, Jonathan Russ wrote: >> >> Is there a FiniteElement in deal.II that allows the addition of degrees >> of freedom at gauss points so

[deal.II] FE w/ Gauss Point DoFs

Hello - I apologize since this question is likely obvious to most, but a quick search didn't reveal the answer to me. Is there a FiniteElement in deal.II that allows the addition of degrees of freedom at gauss points so that the DoFHandler object also manages them? For example, I would like t

Re: [deal.II] SLEPc in Parallel Slower than Serial

Thanks for the suggestions! And thanks again for taking a look! Jonathan On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 3:55:27 PM UTC-6, Tobi Young wrote: > > > Using the Jacobi preconditioner the solution of a single eigenpair > required > > 17 minutes on 2 processors for a problem with 120,000 degrees of > fr

Re: [deal.II] SLEPc in Parallel Slower than Serial

lable for use with SLEPc that I am aware of so for now I will just stick to the serial version of my code. On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 2:53:28 PM UTC-6, Jonathan Russ wrote: > > Hi Toby - > > I have tried the KrylovSchur and Lanczos solvers in both the parallel and > serial code

Re: [deal.II] SLEPc in Parallel Slower than Serial

Lanczos and then try to preconditioner thing. > > See how that works for you and then let me know what results you get. > > One more thing to consider, is your K matrix sparse? > > I hope that gives you a clue on finding out what the problem is. > > Best, >Tobi

[deal.II] SLEPc in Parallel Slower than Serial

Hello - Does anyone have any experience with getting SLEPc to work efficiently in parallel? For some reason, SLEPc in parallel takes roughly 140 times more time to find one eigenvalue and eigenvector than the same solution in serial (i.e. the same matrices). For example, I have a problem with 4

[deal.II] Re: Output incorrect along parallel partition

Thank you again Artur. That worked perfectly. On Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 1:11:51 PM UTC-6, Artur Safin wrote: > > Jonathan, > > My understanding of the situation is this: whenever you output a solution > in parallel, each processor loops over all the cells that it owns and > stores the associa

[deal.II] Re: Output incorrect along parallel partition

Hi Artur - Unfortunately I don't have any hanging node constraints in the model. I do have constraints but there aren't any along the mesh partition. I still can't figure out why my output looks the way it does. The solve function looks like this: unsigned int EigenvalueProblem::solve () {