On Sat, 19 Jul 2014, walter kou wrote:
> Instead of solving Ax=b, where, A is system.matrix; b is system.rhs, x is
> the solutions.
>
> I need to 1) assemble 2 system.rhs: b1 and b2;
> 2) solve A x1 =b1, A x2 =b2;
> 3) then obtain the final solution x = f(x1, x2);
>
> I w
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014, walter kou wrote:
> In my equation systems, I have constant-monomial variables, i.e.
> element-wise variables.
>
> I notice, in the output gmv files, the element-wise variables has same
> number of data as node-wise variables.
>
> How does the node-wise data computed based on
Thank Dmitry,
I've seen the implementation in the NonlinearImplicitSystem. I've also made
my own copy of your implementation in
PETScNonlinearSolver::build_mat_null_space inside my own code to do the
same thing for LinearImplicitSystems. I suspect there is something wrong
with the BlockSize since
Ata,
Note that you can attach a NearNullSpace calculation routine or an
equivalent callable object to your NonlinearSolver
(currently supported only for PetscNonlinearSolver, I believe). The solver
will detect the NearNullSpace calculator,
evaluate it and attach the resulting NearNullSpace to the
Hi all,
Instead of solving Ax=b, where, A is system.matrix; b is system.rhs, x is
the solutions.
I need to 1) assemble 2 system.rhs: b1 and b2;
2) solve A x1 =b1, A x2 =b2;
3) then obtain the final solution x = f(x1, x2);
I wonder how to do the above job. Could I have
Dear all,
In my equation systems, I have constant-monomial variables, i.e.
element-wise variables.
I notice, in the output gmv files, the element-wise variables has same
number of data as node-wise variables.
How does the node-wise data computed based on element-wise results?
In may case, eleme
Dear all,
I was wondering if there is a way to create the coordinates vector for
MatNullSpaceCreateRigidBody? I tried traversing all the nodes in the mesh
by doing something like:
coords->init (no_nodes*dim, no_local_nodes*dim, false, PARALLEL);
coords->zero();
MeshBase::const_node_iterator n
