Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Jukka Aho edc4d5f63e docs: Move immutability blog post to docs/src/book/blog/
- Relocate docs/blog/immutability_performance.md to docs/src/book/blog/
- Comprehensive guide on immutable material models with Tensors.jl
- Covers LinearElastic, NeoHookean, PerfectPlasticity implementations
- Includes full benchmarks: 5× speedup for linear, 21× for plasticity
- Zero allocation performance validated
- Part of three-tier docs reorganization under standard docs/src/ structure
2025-11-10 22:21:15 +02:00
Jukka Aho 7370863806 docs(blog): Add TL;DR version of immutability performance article
New 139-line quick-reference article covering:
- Side-by-side code comparisons (mutable vs immutable)
- 130x speedup summary with key metrics
- Type stability explanation with timing breakdown
- Compiler optimization differences
- Real-world impact table (2.4s → 0.02s)
- Mental model shift (1990s C++ → 2025 modern compilers)
- Quick command to run benchmark
- Links to full article for details
2025-11-09 21:02:21 +02:00
Jukka Aho ad80533334 docs(blog): Add O(n) vs O(1) scaling analysis to immutability article
- Comprehensive section on struct size scaling (1-5000 fields)
- Confirms crossover at 100 fields (800 bytes) for updates
- Shows immutable wins for access/iteration at ALL sizes
- Explains why constants matter more than Big-O
- Typical FEM elements (5-50 fields) well below crossover
- Updated FAQ with scaling questions
- Added references to struct_size_scaling.jl benchmark
- System: Intel Xeon Gold 6326, 32 cores, 503 GB RAM
2025-11-09 21:01:12 +02:00
Jukka Aho 9a55257ba7 docs(blog): Add Literate.jl blog post on Krylov+nodal assembly philosophy
Create 415-line blog post combining technical demonstration with philosophical
vision for JuliaFEM v1.0 nodal assembly architecture.

Content structure:
- Lines 1-32: Why Krylov+nodal is brilliant for contact mechanics
  * Contact is inherently nodal (constraints at nodes, not elements)
  * Krylov only needs matvec (never forms global matrix)
  * Nodal assembly provides natural row-by-row interface
  * O(N) memory vs O(N²) for traditional element assembly

- Lines 34-73: Controversial hypothesis about nodal material modeling
  * Claims material state should be at nodes, not integration points
  * Argues integration points constrain physics to numerical method
  * Variational consistency, physical meaning, scalability arguments
  * "I will show them they're wrong" - experimental vision

- Lines 75-95: GMRES advantage for unsymmetric systems
  * Material nonlinearity, contact, large deformation all unsymmetric
  * GMRES solves positive definite unsymmetric systems
  * O(N·iter) time, O(N) memory vs O(N³)/O(N²) for direct solvers

- Lines 97-415: Working GMRES demonstration on 10×10 unsymmetric system
  * Problem setup: Positive definite but unsymmetric matrix (lines 105-145)
  * Nodal assembly pattern: get_row() interface (lines 147-193)
  * Simplified GMRES implementation (lines 195-282)
  * Execution and verification (lines 284-318)
  * Results: Converged in 10 iterations, 6.28×10⁻¹⁶ relative error
  * Key insights section explaining significance (lines 320-365)
  * Development roadmap: Immediate → Near-term → Long-term → Vision (lines 367-401)
  * Conclusion: Philosophical statement about nodal correctness (lines 403-415)

Technical validation:
- Matrix: 10×10, eigenvalues [9.94, 38.06], condition number 3.83
- Nodal matvec: 1.59×10⁻¹⁴ error vs direct computation
- GMRES: 10 iterations to convergence
- Solution accuracy: 1.23×10⁻¹⁴ absolute error, 6.28×10⁻¹⁶ relative

Dependencies: LinearAlgebra, Random, Printf

Format: Literate.jl (# # for section headers, # for narrative)
Target: Blog post for JuliaFEM v1.0 development documentation
Tone: Opinionated, controversial, technically rigorous
2025-11-09 11:06:43 +02:00