## Search found 154 matches

- Yesterday, 15:14
- Forum: General
- Topic: Time discretization schemes
- Replies:
**1** - Views:
**24**

### Re: Time discretization schemes

Hi, Unfortunately the documentation of the time stepping algorithms is not fully up to date. It seems that there are some options which are not mentioned in the documentation, so a documentation update would be needed. These include at least some Runge-Kutta methods and a fractional step method. I d...

- 29 Jun 2020, 14:40
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: 3D Magnetic Vector Potential Lagrange Gauge Penalization
- Replies:
**6** - Views:
**119**

### Re: 3D Magnetic Vector Potential Lagrange Gauge Penalization

The analysis suggests that, at least for this particular problem, Lagrange gauge has no effect on the solution: I would interpret this that by chance the standard solution doesn't have a significant component which could be represented in terms of a gradient field. On the other hand, how do you com...

- 26 Jun 2020, 13:43
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Linear Solver:BiCGStab/CG/CGS related question
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**86**

### Re: Linear Solver:BiCGStab/CG/CGS related question

1. No, Elmer just tries to solve the linear system with CG without exploring the properties of A. 2. In Elmer the stopping criterion for solving A x = b with CG is computed by default in terms of the true residual as || b - Ax || / || b || < TOL , so the matrix-vector product is really performed in ...

- 25 Jun 2020, 13:39
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: 3D Magnetic Vector Potential Lagrange Gauge Penalization
- Replies:
**6** - Views:
**119**

### Re: 3D Magnetic Vector Potential Lagrange Gauge Penalization

Hi, In the first place I would compare solutions obtained without a gauge condition (Use Lagrange Gauge = False) and with the parameter value k = 1 to see how the Lagrange multiplier formulation affects the vector potential. In exact arithmetic I would expect that the vector potential solution is th...

- 08 Jun 2020, 17:15
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments
- Replies:
**16** - Views:
**968**

### Re: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments

Only the second moments of area ("Second Moment of Area 2" and "Second Moment of Area 3") may currently be asymmetric to produce asymmetric response with respect to bending.

-- Mika

-- Mika

- 14 May 2020, 10:29
- Forum: General
- Topic: BodyForce - edgeDOFs
- Replies:
**1** - Views:
**341**

### Re: BodyForce - edgeDOFs

Hi, At the moment there is no utility which would create an edge element interpolant from the body force construct you assume. In general it would be good to have a subroutine for this task. I mention that the existing solvers which utilize edge finite elements have managed without having this utili...

- 07 May 2020, 14:08
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments
- Replies:
**16** - Views:
**968**

### Re: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments

Thanks for testing,

As an update I mention that partially nonlinear analysis can now be done with "Large Deflection = True". At the moment the beam sections can nevertheless add only linearly behaving stiffness to the combined model, so the nonlinearity arises from the shell part.

-- Mika

As an update I mention that partially nonlinear analysis can now be done with "Large Deflection = True". At the moment the beam sections can nevertheless add only linearly behaving stiffness to the combined model, so the nonlinearity arises from the shell part.

-- Mika

- 05 May 2020, 10:16
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments
- Replies:
**16** - Views:
**968**

### Re: Structure Analysis with both Beam and Shell elments

Hi, The devel version now contains the first version of an enhancement which allows a shell model to have one-dimensional beam sections. At the moment the combined model can be assembled in the case of linear analysis only (Large Deflection = False in the solver section of the shell model). Paramete...

- 28 Apr 2020, 10:53
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Simulation of the force between two magnets
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**2069**

### Re: Simulation of the force between two magnets

In the 3D case the source is defined as "Magnetization 1 = Real 9.55e5". Should it be "Magnetization 3 = Real 9.55e5" in order to have the same case (the magnetization vector aligned with the axis)?

-- Mika

-- Mika

- 18 Apr 2020, 17:19
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: Introducing springs to a point/face as a boundary condition
- Replies:
**62** - Views:
**2521**

### Re: Introducing springs to a point/face as a boundary condition

are there any reasons why Spring 4 is rotation Y instead of X? is it the same syntax to include mass points? Springs and DOFs are enumerated in the same way. To understand the enumeration, the "rotational" DOFs should not be thought of as (approximate) rotations, but in the first place they just gi...