From: Wolfgang Bangerth Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 17:31:57 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Patch by Oleh Krehel: many typo and other small fixes. X-Git-Tag: v8.1.0~1114 X-Git-Url: https://gitweb.dealii.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=a1dd35063de93d137d0877ee0ef6a0411b867d9b;p=dealii.git Patch by Oleh Krehel: many typo and other small fixes. git-svn-id: https://svn.dealii.org/trunk@30258 0785d39b-7218-0410-832d-ea1e28bc413d --- diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/intro.dox index 2c37a1d863..81ff567e44 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/intro.dox @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ following, let us consider some of the tools one would employ when simulating problems in which the deformation becomes large. @note The model we will consider below is not founded on anything that -would be mathematical sound: we will consider a model in which we +would be mathematically sound: we will consider a model in which we produce a small deformation, deform the physical coordinates of the body by this deformation, and then consider the next loading step again as a linear problem. This isn't consistent, since the assumption diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/results.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/results.dox index 7c3c022825..b59460a793 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/results.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-18/doc/results.dox @@ -111,10 +111,10 @@ examples/\step-18> ../\step-19/\step-19 Converter from deal.II intermediate format to other graphics formats. -Usage: ./\step-19 [-p parameter_file] list_of_input_files [-x output_format] output_file +Usage: ./\step-19 [-p parameter_file] list_of_input_files [-x output_format] -o output_file -examples/\step-18> ../\step-19/\step-19 solution-0001.0000.d2 -x gmv solution-0001.0000.gmv -examples/\step-18> ../\step-19/\step-19 solution-0002.0000.d2 -x gmv solution-0002.0000.gmv +examples/\step-18> ../\step-19/\step-19 solution-0001.0000.d2 -x gmv -o solution-0001.0000.gmv +examples/\step-18> ../\step-19/\step-19 solution-0002.0000.d2 -x gmv -o solution-0002.0000.gmv [...] @endcode Of course, since we have run the program only in sequential mode, we diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-18/step-18.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-18/step-18.cc index 6778fdebe5..9de024169a 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-18/step-18.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-18/step-18.cc @@ -106,8 +106,8 @@ namespace Step18 // in the form $C_{ijkl} = \mu (\delta_{ik} \delta_{jl} + \delta_{il} // \delta_{jk}) + \lambda \delta_{ij} \delta_{kl}$. This tensor maps // symmetric tensor of rank 2 to symmetric tensors of rank 2. A function - // implementing its creation for given values of the Lame constants lambda - // and mu is straightforward: + // implementing its creation for given values of the Lame constants $\lambda$ + // and $\mu$ is straightforward: template SymmetricTensor<4,dim> get_stress_strain_tensor (const double lambda, const double mu) @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ namespace Step18 // One difference of this program is that we declare the quadrature // formula in the class declaration. The reason is that in all the other // programs, it didn't do much harm if we had used different quadrature - // formulas when computing the matrix and the righ hand side, for + // formulas when computing the matrix and the right hand side, for // example. However, in the present case it does: we store information in // the quadrature points, so we have to make sure all parts of the program // agree on where they are and how many there are on each cell. Thus, let @@ -1456,7 +1456,7 @@ namespace Step18 // As a last piece of data, let us also add the partitioning of the domain // into subdomains associated with the processors if this is a parallel // job. This works in the exact same way as in the step-17 program: - std::vector partition_int (triangulation.n_active_cells()); + std::vector partition_int (triangulation.n_active_cells()); GridTools::get_subdomain_association (triangulation, partition_int); const Vector partitioning(partition_int.begin(), partition_int.end()); diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-19/step-19.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-19/step-19.cc index 5aece72781..17bec2c4ab 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-19/step-19.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-19/step-19.cc @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ namespace Step19 prm.get_bool ("Dummy generate output"); } prm.leave_subsection (); - // We would assign the result to a variable, or course, but don't + // We would assign the result to a variable, of course, but don't // here in order not to generate an unused variable that the // compiler might warn about. // diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/intro.dox index 88610b47f7..1139efd2bd 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/intro.dox @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ time derivatives for both variables, for which it is simple to write down time stepping schemes. Note that we do not have boundary conditions for $v$ at first. However, we could enforce $v=\frac{\partial g}{\partial t}$ on the boundary. It turns out in numerical examples that this -as actually necessary: without doing so the solution doesn't look particularly +is actually necessary: without doing so the solution doesn't look particularly wrong, but the Crank-Nicolson scheme does not conserve energy if one doesn't enforce these boundary conditions. @@ -296,9 +296,9 @@ where \\ A^{n,n-1}_{ij} &=& (\nabla\phi_i^n, \nabla\phi_j^{n-1}), \\ - F^n_{ij} &=& (f^n,\phi_i^n), + F^n_{i} &=& (f^n,\phi_i^n), \\ - F^{n-1}_{ij} &=& (f^{n-1},\phi_i^n). + F^{n-1}_{i} &=& (f^{n-1},\phi_i^n). @f} If we solve these two equations, we can move the solution one step diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/results.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/results.dox index 513699f9f9..1c86e3eb7d 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/results.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-23/doc/results.dox @@ -105,8 +105,8 @@ If you want to explore a bit, try out some of the following things: To make such a change, we would have to compute the mass and Laplace matrices with a variable coefficient. Fortunately, this isn't too hard: the - functions MatrixTools::create_laplace_matrix and - MatrixTools::create_vector_tools have additional default parameters that can + functions MatrixCreator::create_laplace_matrix and + MatrixCreator::create_mass_matrix have additional default parameters that can be used to pass non-constant coefficient functions to them. The required changes are therefore relatively small. On the other hand, care must be taken again to make sure the time step is within the allowed range. diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-23/step-23.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-23/step-23.cc index 2a0830ccba..3fb30e3476 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-23/step-23.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-23/step-23.cc @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ // Here are the only three include files of some new interest: The first one // is already used, for example, for the // VectorTools::interpolate_boundary_values and -// VectorTools::apply_boundary_values functions. However, we here use another +// MatrixTools::apply_boundary_values functions. However, we here use another // function in that class, VectorTools::project to compute our initial values // as the $L^2$ projection of the continuous initial values. Furthermore, we // use VectorTools::create_right_hand_side to generate the integrals @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ // mass and Laplace matrices, although it would have only taken copying the // relevant code from any number of previous tutorial programs. Rather, we // want to focus on the things that are truly new to this program and -// therefore use the MatrixTools::create_mass_matrix and -// MatrixTools::create_laplace_matrix functions. They are declared here: +// therefore use the MatrixCreator::create_mass_matrix and +// MatrixCreator::create_laplace_matrix functions. They are declared here: #include // Finally, here is an include file that contains all sorts of tool functions diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-24/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-24/doc/intro.dox index 4ee0f37f70..c3a23332cc 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-24/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-24/doc/intro.dox @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ defined as the derivative of the pressure potential: v = \frac{\partial\bar{p}}{\partial t} @f] -With the second variables, one then transform the forward problem into +With the second variable, one then transforms the forward problem into two separate equations: @f{eqnarray*} \bar{p}_{t} - v & = & 0 \\ diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-24/step-24.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-24/step-24.cc index 6e850c5d6d..e44ea21f12 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-24/step-24.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-24/step-24.cc @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ namespace Step24 // pressure. In the physical setting considered in this program, these are // small absorbers, which we model as a series of little circles where we // assume that the pressure surplus is one, whereas no absorption and - // therefore no pressure surplus is anywhere else. This is how we do things + // therefore no pressure surplus is everywhere else. This is how we do things // (note that if we wanted to expand this program to not only compile but // also to run, we would have to initialize the sources with // three-dimensional source locations): @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ namespace Step24 // // A first observation would be that this matrix is much sparser than the // regular mass matrix, since none of the shape functions with purely - // interior support contributes to this matrix. We could therefore + // interior support contribute to this matrix. We could therefore // optimize the storage pattern to this situation and build up a second // sparsity pattern that only contains the nonzero entries that we // need. There is a trade-off to make here: first, we would have to have a @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ namespace Step24 // consumption of the program, the introduction of a few temporary vectors // isn't doing much harm. // - // The only changes to this function are: First, that we do not have to + // The only changes to this function are: first, that we do not have to // project initial values for the velocity $v$, since we know that it is // zero. And second that we evaluate the solution at the detector locations // computed in the constructor. This is done using the diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-25/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-25/doc/intro.dox index f43b6a3178..96f269cc3a 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-25/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-25/doc/intro.dox @@ -101,8 +101,8 @@ To this end, we can use Newton's method. Given the nonlinear equation $F(u^n) = \mbox{ Find } \delta u^n_l \mbox{ s.t. } F'(u^n_l)\delta u^n_l = -F(u^n_l) \mbox{, set } u^n_{l+1} = u^n_l + \delta u^n_l. \f} -The iteration can be initialized with the old time step, i.e. $u^{n,0} = -u^{n-1}$, and eventually it will produce a solution to the first equation of +The iteration can be initialized with the old time step, i.e. $u^n_0 = u^{n-1}$, +and eventually it will produce a solution to the first equation of the split formulation (see above). For the time discretizaion of the sine-Gordon equation under consideration here, we have that \f{eqnarray*} @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ With hindsight, we choose both the solution and the test space to be $H^1(\Omega &\mbox{ Find}& \delta u^n_l \in H^1(\Omega) \mbox{ s.t. } \left( F'(u^n_l)\delta u^n_l, \varphi \right)_{\Omega} = -\left(F(u^n_l), \varphi \right)_{\Omega} \;\forall\varphi\in H^1(\Omega), - \mbox{ set } u^n_{l+1} = u^n_l + \delta u^n_l,\; u^{n,0} = u^{n-1}.\\ + \mbox{ set } u^n_{l+1} = u^n_l + \delta u^n_l,\; u^n_0 = u^{n-1}.\\ &\mbox{ Find}& v^n \in H^1(\Omega) \mbox{ s.t. } \left( v^n, \varphi \right)_{\Omega} = \left( v^{n-1}, \varphi \right)_{\Omega} - k\theta\left( \nabla u^n, \nabla\varphi \right)_{\Omega} @@ -157,9 +157,9 @@ Above, the matrix $F_h'(\cdot)$ and the vector $F_h(\cdot)$ denote the discrete \f{eqnarray*} F_h(U^{n,l}) &=& \left[ M+k^2\theta^2A \right] U^{n,l} - \left[ M-k^2\theta(1-\theta)A \right] U^{n-1} - k MV^{n-1} - + k^2\theta S(u^{n,l}, u^{n-1}),\\ + + k^2\theta S(u^n_l, u^{n-1}),\\ F_h'(U^{n,l}) &=& M+k^2\theta^2A - - k^2\theta^2N(u^{n,l},u^{n-1}) + - k^2\theta^2N(u^n_l,u^{n-1}) \f} Again, note that the first matrix equation above is, in fact, the defition of an iterative procedure, so it is solved multiple times @@ -176,9 +176,9 @@ i.e. $N_{ij}(f,g) = \left( \cos\left[ \theta f + (1-\theta) g\right]\varphi_i, What solvers can we use for the first equation? Let's look at the matrix we have to invert: @f[ - (M-k^2\theta^2N)_{ij} = + (M+k^2\theta^2(A-N))_{ij} = \int_\Omega (1-k^2\theta^2 \cos \alpha) - \varphi_i\varphi_j \; dx, + \varphi_i\varphi_j \; dx+\int_\Omega \nabla\varphi_i\nabla\varphi_j \; dx, @f] for some $\alpha$ that depends on the present and previous solution. First, note that the matrix is symmetric. In addition, if the time step $k$ is small diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-25/step-25.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-25/step-25.cc index 9d577ccdc7..af5ebd5d29 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-25/step-25.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-25/step-25.cc @@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ namespace Step25 // @sect4{SineGordonProblem::assemble_system} - // This functions assembles the system matrix and right-hand side vector for + // This function assembles the system matrix and right-hand side vector for // each iteration of Newton's method. The reader should refer to the // Introduction for the explicit formulas for the system matrix and // right-hand side. @@ -350,7 +350,6 @@ namespace Step25 { // First we assemble the Jacobian matrix $F'_h(U^{n,l})$, where $U^{n,l}$ // is stored in the vector solution for convenience. - system_matrix = 0; system_matrix.copy_from (mass_matrix); system_matrix.add (std::pow(time_step*theta,2), laplace_matrix); @@ -361,7 +360,6 @@ namespace Step25 // Then, we compute the right-hand side vector $-F_h(U^{n,l})$. system_rhs = 0; - tmp_matrix = 0; tmp_matrix.copy_from (mass_matrix); tmp_matrix.add (std::pow(time_step*theta,2), laplace_matrix); @@ -369,17 +367,14 @@ namespace Step25 tmp_matrix.vmult (tmp_vector, solution); system_rhs += tmp_vector; - tmp_matrix = 0; tmp_matrix.copy_from (mass_matrix); tmp_matrix.add (-std::pow(time_step,2)*theta*(1-theta), laplace_matrix); - tmp_vector = 0; tmp_matrix.vmult (tmp_vector, old_solution); system_rhs -= tmp_vector; system_rhs.add (-time_step, M_x_velocity); - tmp_vector = 0; compute_nl_term (old_solution, solution, tmp_vector); system_rhs.add (std::pow(time_step,2)*theta, tmp_vector); @@ -413,6 +408,7 @@ namespace Step25 const Vector &new_data, Vector &nl_term) const { + nl_term = 0; const QGauss quadrature_formula (3); FEValues fe_values (fe, quadrature_formula, update_values | @@ -433,6 +429,7 @@ namespace Step25 for (; cell!=endc; ++cell) { + local_nl_term = 0; // Once we re-initialize our FEValues instantiation to // the current cell, we make use of the // get_function_values routine to get the values of the @@ -459,8 +456,6 @@ namespace Step25 for (unsigned int i=0; iFEValues // instantiation to the current cell. fe_values.reinit (cell); @@ -521,8 +517,6 @@ namespace Step25 for (unsigned int j=0; j preconditioner; preconditioner.initialize(system_matrix, 1.2); - solution_update = 0; cg.solve (system_matrix, solution_update, system_rhs, preconditioner); @@ -686,11 +679,9 @@ namespace Step25 laplace_matrix.vmult (tmp_vector, solution); M_x_velocity.add (-time_step*theta, tmp_vector); - tmp_vector = 0; laplace_matrix.vmult (tmp_vector, old_solution); M_x_velocity.add (-time_step*(1-theta), tmp_vector); - tmp_vector = 0; compute_nl_term (old_solution, solution, tmp_vector); M_x_velocity.add (-time_step, tmp_vector); diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-28/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-28/doc/intro.dox index 179a8fa239..b7076cbc86 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-28/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-28/doc/intro.dox @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ one. A stable reactor should have $k_{\mathrm{eff}}=1$. [For those who wonder how this can be achieved in practice without inadvertently getting slightly larger than one and triggering a nuclear bomb: first, fission processes happen on different time scales. While most neutrons -are releases very quickly after a fission event, a small number of neutrons +are released very quickly after a fission event, a small number of neutrons are only released by daughter nuclei after several further decays, up to 10-60 seconds after the fission was initiated. If one is therefore slightly beyond $k_{\mathrm{eff}}=1$, one therefore has many seconds to react until all the @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ these three cases, as follows:
  • If the cell $K$ is active on mesh $g$, but not $g'$, then the basis functions $\varphi_{g'}^j$ are only defined either on the children $K_c,0\le c<2^{\texttt{dim}}$, or on children of these children if cell $K$ - is refined more than once more on mesh $g'$. + is refined more than once on mesh $g'$. Let us assume for a second that $K$ is only once more refined on mesh $g'$ than on mesh $g$. Using the fact that we use embedded finite element spaces diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-29/doc/intro.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-29/doc/intro.dox index 73cd997c5e..03f347e791 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-29/doc/intro.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-29/doc/intro.dox @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ toplevel overview of this topic can be found in the @ref vector_valued module. The original purpose of this program is to simulate the focussing properties of an ultrasound wave generated by a transducer lens with variable geometry. Recent applications in medical imaging use ultrasound waves not only -for imaging porposes, but also to excite certain local effects in a +for imaging purposes, but also to excite certain local effects in a material, like changes in optical properties, that can then be measured by other imaging techniques. A vital ingredient for these methods is the ability to focus the intensity of the ultrasound wave in a particular part of the @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ of the circle with center at $(0.5, d)$ and a radius slightly greater than $d$; this shape should lead to a focusing of the sound wave at the center of the circle. Varying $d$ changes the "focus" of the lens and affects the spatial distribution of the intensity of $u$, where our main -concern is how well $|u|=\sqrt{v^2+w^2}$ is.focussed. +concern is how well $|u|=\sqrt{v^2+w^2}$ is focussed. In the program below, we will implement the complex-valued Helmholtz equations using the formulation with split real and imaginary parts. We will also diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-29/step-29.cc b/deal.II/examples/step-29/step-29.cc index 09bc7a071e..9c3360572b 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-29/step-29.cc +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-29/step-29.cc @@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ namespace Step29 ExcDimensionMismatch (computed_quantities[i].size(), 1)); Assert(uh[i].size() == 2, ExcDimensionMismatch (uh[i].size(), 2)); - computed_quantities[i](0) = sqrt(uh[i](0)*uh[i](0) + uh[i](1)*uh[i](1)); + computed_quantities[i](0) = std::sqrt(uh[i](0)*uh[i](0) + uh[i](1)*uh[i](1)); } }