Hello!
I was experimenting with Dealii examples and stumbled on some error I can
not find a reason for.
I modified the example step-36 by defining an area like a pyramid on top of
a truncated pyramid.
I constructed the truncated pyramid from 5 simplexes and top pyramid of 2
simplexes by merging
Hello,
Since I am moving the mesh physically, the current coordinates are of the
current configuration. I am trying to make a new fe_values object with
mapping as shown below but I am getting an error
An error occurred in line <114> of file in
function
virtual dealii::Subscriptor::~Subsc
On 03/31/2017 01:30 PM, Jaekwang Kim wrote:
I found that what was the problem.
I was using 'maximum' Meshsmoothing which does not allow
So, It was not a bug of deal.ii but I was using wrong smoothing method
that does not go along with anisotropy,
Well, it is still a bug that the library did
Thanks Bruno ! and Dr. Wolfgang!
I found that what was the problem.
I was using 'maximum' Meshsmoothing which does not allow
So, It was not a bug of deal.ii but I was using wrong smoothing method that
does not go along with anisotropy,
I just changed my Meshsmoothing Method, that allow anis
Jaekwang,
2017-03-30 17:39 GMT-04:00 Jaekwang Kim :
> //This one is problematic
> triangulation.prepare_coarsening_and_refinement ();
It could be a bug in the library, most people don't use anisotropic
refinement. This function is not always necessary (and it is not used
in step-30
Nice interview.
I really enjoyed the cast.
--
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.
Dear Seyed Ali,
but this does not make sense since the finite
element approximation on one element is far from being meaningful.
Anything you obtain has a huge discretization error.
In addition, this result will not be independent of phase-field.
I would rather do it as we did (and usually done
Dear Thomas,
I would like to check the elastic energy you compute and compare it to my
results. For a single element the computation in an elastic regime should
be independent from the phase-field approach in primary steps.
BR,
Seyed Ali
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii
Dear Seyed Ali,
what do you mean by "one element test"?
Really to compute on one single element ?
This can never work:
1. First of all the phase-field will not be resolved
because of the regularization parameter eps.
2. This contradicts any idea of numerical methods
to have a reasonab
Dear Thomas,
I tried what you suggested and it works. Thank you :)
There is a slight problem though when I try to compute the same example
with the same boundary conditions for the unit_square_4.inp file. I am
trying to run a one element test using your phase-field approach. It works,
but there
10 matches
Mail list logo
