Nowadays a solver may indeed activate the execution of another solver. For some documentation of different options see the section 13.2 of ElmerSolver Manual (http://www.nic.funet.fi/pub/sci/physics ... Manual.pdf).
-- Mika
Search found 230 matches
- 30 Dec 2020, 11:09
- Forum: General
- Topic: Calling a solver from another solver
- Replies: 2
- Views: 1990
- 30 Dec 2020, 10:40
- Forum: General
- Topic: Mesh keyword in solver section ?
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1839
Re: Mesh keyword in solver section ?
Hi, The keyword for giving a mesh in solver section is "Mesh". For example, if the mesh files are contained in directory "solverwise_mesh" under the working directory, one may give the command Mesh = "solverwise_mesh". If some solver section doesn't specify a mesh, then...
- 15 Dec 2020, 10:15
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 5522
Re: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
Seeing "Version: 9.0 (Rev: Release, Compiled: 2020-12-13)" I doubt your executable has not been compiled using fresh source files from the devel branch. For example, if the source files are the latest versions from Dec 11, 2020, Elmer is expected to output the revision information as MAIN:...
- 14 Dec 2020, 18:30
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: Flow due to pressure
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3807
Re: Flow due to pressure
On the other hand the keyword "Pressure i" defines directly the components of the traction vector s(n) with respect to the basis vectors of the global frame. In this case the normal is automatically directed by Elmer to point outwards from the body containing the fluid. To get the same pro...
- 14 Dec 2020, 11:16
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: Flow due to pressure
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3807
Re: Flow due to pressure
Unfortunately the historical choice of some keywords may cause confusion. The keyword "External Pressure" basically defines the surface traction (surface force) s applied to the fluid by the environment in terms of unit normal vector n to the boundary as s(n) = p_ext n. If we neglect visco...
- 09 Dec 2020, 09:38
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 5522
Re: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
There was another bug in the computation of magnetic field strength. This has now been fixed in the devel branch.
Thanks for reporting,
Mika
Thanks for reporting,
Mika
- 08 Dec 2020, 14:12
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 5522
Re: Relation between “Magnetic Field Strength” and “Magnetic Flux Density” ?
Hi, I found a bug in the reluctivity evaluation when the constant "Permeability of Vacuum" was given by the user in the constants section. This has now been fixed in the devel branch. The error wasn't nevertheless just a multiplication by four, so I'm not sure whether this explains your ob...
- 03 Dec 2020, 17:11
- Forum: Bug reports
- Topic: ElmerToGmshIndex in SaveUtils.F90
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2541
Re: ElmerToGmshIndex in SaveUtils.F90
Hi,
I believe these issues have now been fixed in the devel branch of the code repository.
Thanks for reporting,
Mika
I believe these issues have now been fixed in the devel branch of the code repository.
Thanks for reporting,
Mika
- 03 Dec 2020, 16:31
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: magnetic field of a permanent magnet in 3D
- Replies: 11
- Views: 6790
Re: magnetic field of a permanent magnet in 3D
Unfortunately I observed that the postprocessing solver (MagnetoDynamicsCalcFields) has neglected the magnetization vector when the magnetization vector has been given in a material section or only elemental approximations have been calculated. This has now been corrected in the devel branch of the ...
- 30 Nov 2020, 12:07
- Forum: ElmerSolver
- Topic: HelmholtzSolve and p-elements
- Replies: 2
- Views: 1593
Re: HelmholtzSolve and p-elements
Does the Helmholtz Solver support p-elements? Yes What would be the best way to figure out if a solver supports p-elements? Is trial error a viable way (i.e. will solvers not supporting p-elements produce an error in the logs if the keyword is set?) Unfortunately it is not usually clearly indicated...