From: wolf Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 08:46:29 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Finish results section. X-Git-Url: https://gitweb.dealii.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=8eb7f614356248e3ebf8ce8a1c7e5ed096654a88;p=dealii-svn.git Finish results section. git-svn-id: https://svn.dealii.org/trunk@5016 0785d39b-7218-0410-832d-ea1e28bc413d --- diff --git a/deal.II/doc/tutorial/chapter-2.step-by-step/step-11.data/results.html b/deal.II/doc/tutorial/chapter-2.step-by-step/step-11.data/results.html index b7832cdd97..75ab4e996c 100644 --- a/deal.II/doc/tutorial/chapter-2.step-by-step/step-11.data/results.html +++ b/deal.II/doc/tutorial/chapter-2.step-by-step/step-11.data/results.html @@ -1,7 +1,8 @@

Results

- +

+This is what the program outputs:

 Using mapping with degree 1:
 ============================
@@ -32,4 +33,15 @@ cells  |u|_1    error
   320 1.250059 0.003255 
  1280 1.252495 0.000819 
  5120 1.253109 0.000205 
-
\ No newline at end of file + +As we expected, the convergence order for each of the different +mappings is clearly quadratic in the mesh size. What is +interesting, though, is that the error for a bilinear mapping +(i.e. degree 1) is more that three times larger than that for the +higher order mappings; it is therefore clearly advantageous in this +case to use a higher order mapping, not because it improves the order +of convergence but just to reduce the constant before the convergence +order. On the other hand, using a cubic mapping only improves the +result further insignicantly, except for the case of very coarse +grids. +

\ No newline at end of file