dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

The output was off by 1 (since dim = 1 with u(mesh, x, 1)) and
probably the i -> i+1 cancelled that in some way...

Maybe we should fix the Poisson solver completely before we start
working on systems, since we also need to change the structure (remove
Problem and Solver)?

/Anders

On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 03:00:13AM -0500, Johan Hoffman wrote:
> 
> Good. In the earlier version there were oscillations (isolated nodvalues 
> that were off) in the solutions, and the bc where not satisfied. Changing 
> from i->i+1 made the bc correct, although there where still some 
> oscillations in the solution.
> 
> So to get the solution to work now something else that i+1->i must have 
> been changed. When I now change back i->i+1 I do not get back the 
> (oscillating) solution from before, but a complete wrong solution without 
> the bc satisfied.
> 
> Anyway, the important thing is that it now works! Next thing is to make 
> sure systems and eqns with coefficients go the whole way.
> 
> /Johan
> 
> >Commit from logg (2005-02-11 04:16 CET)
> >
> >Fixed Poisson solver:
> >
> >- Solver now gives the same results as the old solver
> >- Changed mapping of boundary ids from i+1 to i (why was that so?)
> >- Corrected creation of function u for saving (removed extra argument
> > dim = 1)
> >- Added the old code in solveOld() for comparison
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DOLFIN-dev mailing list
> DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fenics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
>