> On Apr 28, 2017, at 2:36 AM, neok m4700 wrote:
>
> Hello Barry,
>
> Thank you for answering.
>
> I quote the DMDA webpage:
> "The vectors can be thought of as either cell centered or vertex centered on
> the mesh. But some variables cannot be cell centered and others vertex
> centered."
>
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:36 AM, neok m4700 wrote:
> Hello Barry,
>
> Thank you for answering.
>
> I quote the DMDA webpage:
> "The vectors can be thought of as either cell centered or vertex centered
> on the mesh. But some variables cannot be cell centered and others vertex
> centered."
>
> So
Hello Barry,
Thank you for answering.
I quote the DMDA webpage:
"The vectors can be thought of as either cell centered or vertex centered
on the mesh. But some variables cannot be cell centered and others vertex
centered."
So If I use this, then when creating the DMDA the overall size will be th
> On Apr 27, 2017, at 12:43 PM, neok m4700 wrote:
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thank you for the clarification, however, it is unclear why there is an
> additional unknown in the case of periodic bcs.
>
> Please see attached to this email what I'd like to achieve, the number of
> unknowns does not c
Hi Matthew,
Thank you for the clarification, however, it is unclear why there is an
additional unknown in the case of periodic bcs.
Please see attached to this email what I'd like to achieve, the number of
unknowns does not change when switching to the periodic case for e.g. a
laplace operator.
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:46 AM, neok m4700 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to change my problem to using periodic boundary conditions.
>
> However, when I use DMDASetUniformCoordinates on the DA, the spacing
> changes.
>
> This is due to an additional point e.g. in dm/impls/da/gr1.c
>
> else if (di
Hi,
I am trying to change my problem to using periodic boundary conditions.
However, when I use DMDASetUniformCoordinates on the DA, the spacing
changes.
This is due to an additional point e.g. in dm/impls/da/gr1.c
else if (dim == 2) {
if (bx == DM_BOUNDARY_PERIODIC) hx = (xmax-xmin)/(M);