Henrik Sönnerlind
COMSOL Employee
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
4 years ago
11 août 2020, 17:35 UTC−4
If you are looking at the noneliminated stiffness matrix, this is expected, but not if you are looking at the eliminated version. What type pf physics and boundary conditions are involved?
-------------------
Henrik Sönnerlind
COMSOL
If you are looking at the noneliminated stiffness matrix, this is expected, but not if you are looking at the eliminated version. What type pf physics and boundary conditions are involved?
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
4 years ago
11 août 2020, 21:03 UTC−4
Hi Henrik,
Thank you for the reply. I tried looking at both the eliminated and full stiffness matrices and both give the same result.
I am using a General Form PDE that is the same physics as the MFH module to calculate the magnetic field of a superconductor. The boundary condition used is a Dirichlet condition to set the magnetic field at the domain boundary.
Cheers,
Alex
Hi Henrik,
Thank you for the reply. I tried looking at both the eliminated and full stiffness matrices and both give the same result.
I am using a General Form PDE that is the same physics as the MFH module to calculate the magnetic field of a superconductor. The boundary condition used is a Dirichlet condition to set the magnetic field at the domain boundary.
Cheers,
Alex
Henrik Sönnerlind
COMSOL Employee
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
4 years ago
12 août 2020, 05:38 UTC−4
Then it difficult to guess. With sufficient Dirichlet conditions, the eliminated matrix should be nonsingular. What are the sizes of the two matrices?
-------------------
Henrik Sönnerlind
COMSOL
Then it difficult to guess. With sufficient Dirichlet conditions, the eliminated matrix should be nonsingular. What are the sizes of the two matrices?
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
4 years ago
24 août 2020, 17:21 UTC−4
Hello,
It turns out that the stiffness matrix is singular in my case since we are taking the curl of the test functions in the weak formulation (not sure why this makes the matrix singular, but I read it in a few research papers). Therefore, you need to calculate the condition number of the addition of the stiffness matrix and the damping matrix in order to consider the time-dependence of the weak formulation.
Cheers,
Alex
Hello,
It turns out that the stiffness matrix is singular in my case since we are taking the curl of the test functions in the weak formulation (not sure why this makes the matrix singular, but I read it in a few research papers). Therefore, you need to calculate the condition number of the addition of the stiffness matrix and the damping matrix in order to consider the time-dependence of the weak formulation.
Cheers,
Alex