New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
update inclusion benchmark #788
Conversation
bjs2
commented
Mar 9, 2016
- change output directories for global and adaptive
- include velocity and pressure dofs in error output line
- include option to turn on averaging
- change output directories for global and adaptive - include velocity and pressure dofs in error output line - include option to turn on averaging
@tjhei Is this work in progress, or is this open for review? |
I thing this is good to go. /run-tests |
@@ -513,13 +513,16 @@ namespace aspect | |||
VectorTools::L2_norm, | |||
&comp_p); | |||
|
|||
unsigned int n = this->get_solution().block(0).size() + | |||
this->get_solution().block(1).size(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be good to use introspection.block_indices.pressure (and the same for the velocity) instead of just 0 and 1 here. Also, if the direct solver is used, pressure and velocity are in the same block, and then the numbers 0 and 1 are suddenly not correct any more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
agreed
- Modify inclusion.cc to output correct number of DoF's if the direct solver is used - Modify run.sh to loop through different averaging schemes (none, arithmetic, geometric)
Thanks for updating the pull request! |
There should be an adaptive run for each type of averaging, and this was the case when I ran the shell script. I believe the run.sh has a nested for-loop. These are the results from when I ran it: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GYPWl4UOe-Jc5AkVqDX6PDQmL73YU-0S9rwBi7S-Ce0/edit?usp=sharing |
Ah, I get it, because you use the option to run the postprocessors on the initial refinement you get the output for every refinement step. |