From a1363875a7b0e743d073d4d271b4dbcda1e6b1ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Kronbichler Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:18:18 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ... and one more. git-svn-id: https://svn.dealii.org/trunk@31426 0785d39b-7218-0410-832d-ea1e28bc413d --- deal.II/examples/step-51/doc/results.dox | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/deal.II/examples/step-51/doc/results.dox b/deal.II/examples/step-51/doc/results.dox index 25db8378b4..56a040d44f 100644 --- a/deal.II/examples/step-51/doc/results.dox +++ b/deal.II/examples/step-51/doc/results.dox @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ somewhat higher order, usually around p=3. This is because of a volume-to-surface effect for discontinuous solutions with too much of the solution living on the surfaces and hence duplicating work when the elements are linear. Put in other words, DG methods are often most efficient when used -at relatively high order, despite their focus on discontinuous (and hence, +at relatively high order, despite their focus on a discontinuous (and hence, seemingly low accurate) representation of solutions.

Resuls for 3D

-- 2.39.5