-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Perpendicular flap (IGA solid participant G+Smo) #603
Perpendicular flap (IGA solid participant G+Smo) #603
Conversation
…stress; Modified precice-config.xml to communicate with stress
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for these great contributions!
I did not yet try it out, but wanted to give some initial tips already.
Guidelines worth checking out:
- tutorials contribution guidelines
- style guide of the preCICE docs.
Co-authored-by: Benjamin Uekermann <[email protected]>
I am trying to install and run the case. I am doing:
and get
And normal I am a bit puzzled. How do I build the I guess what we need to do is to install the lib / make is discoverable and then add a |
Hi Benjamin, Thanks for testing this! The thing is, if you try to compile the file from the G+Smo side, we are using a different name for the filename since G+Smo and preCICE have different naming rules. On the G+Smo side, the solid participant filename is Since we have multiple CPP files on our side, we cannot use a simple name like |
With a few minor changes, I was able to run the case. Most importantly, I changed the data mapping constraint for the stresses to "consistent". I now get: The missing difference is probably due to the elements or refinement?
The file I will continue cleaning up the case the next days. Please don't force push. |
@Crazy-Rich-Meghan The results look good now 👍 What did you change? |
Hi @uekerman , for the nonlinear version we iterate with Jacobian matrix, and the linear version with stiffness matrix. In principle, if the problem we are solving is a linear problem, the nonlinear time integrator should converge within the first timestep and result should be the same as time-integrator with stiffness matrix, that's why you see they are overlapping. And we checked the source code from dealii, in linear_elasticity there is no geometric nonlinearlity so we changed a bit from our side. |
Co-authored-by: Benjamin Uekermann <[email protected]>
fce67e9
to
a69bc8e
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks a lot for the contribution! Looks already very neat! I also compared the differences to the perpendicular-flap and it looks very clean. I also think that it is fine having this as a separate subcase, and I expect we will have more solvers opting for stresses instead of forces.
I could not run the case, but maybe I am doing something wrong, or something still needs to be documented. Other than that, this is in good shape already.
Co-authored-by: Gerasimos Chourdakis <[email protected]>
I tried to do it as Makis suggested and I arrived at the similar error. So I set back G+Smo and submodules few commits and now it worked for me:
And my PC is Ubuntu 24.04. @hverhelst Maybe you have an idea about what is going wrong here, could be related to one of the recent commits to G+Smo. |
Thanks again for your help! We @hverhelst have merged PRs to stable G+Smo and the preCICE adapter to fix the compatibility with the newer version G+Smo. Now the previous mentioned issue should be resolved |
@Crazy-Rich-Meghan @hverhelst side question: How do you normally rebuild G+smo? Do you always need to make a clean build? Whenever I try to pull (also in the submodules) and directly run I am just trying to save a bit of time, since a clean build takes a while. Not urgent (I already rebuilt successfully), but I was wondering. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks perfect to me now, thanks for the quick updates! 😄
See also precice/precice.github.io#516
@MakisH I never run a clean build. I usually pull (incl. submodules) and run a |
Ah, ok, I guess I stumbled upon some of the breaking changes then. I was also previously building all targets, which probably increased the range of what can go wrong. I did not log the messages, as this was clearly a dirty build. Thanks! |
Perpendicular Flap with G+Smo (IsoGeometric Analysis) and OpenFOAM
NOTE:
Stress
instead ofForce
.This PR is still a draft, because the G+Smo adapter's documentation is still ongoing.
I have added a README.md file to guide users on running the tutorial with G+Smo. It includes detailed instructions for setup and execution.