getdp issueshttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues2022-05-24T11:11:04Zhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/131ValueFromTable and NodeTable from file2022-05-24T11:11:04ZErik SchnaubeltValueFromTable and NodeTable from fileHello,
Is it possible to use `ValueFromTable` in a `Constraint` of `Type Init` for a file saved with `Format NodeTable`?
I see that it's possible using the ONELAB variable. However, in my case, I'd like to save my vector of unknowns ...Hello,
Is it possible to use `ValueFromTable` in a `Constraint` of `Type Init` for a file saved with `Format NodeTable`?
I see that it's possible using the ONELAB variable. However, in my case, I'd like to save my vector of unknowns (all nodal values) to file from a first `.pro` file and then use these DoFs from the file in a second `.pro` as initial condition. On an algebraic level, the vectors (last step of first `.pro` and initial step of second `.pro`) could really be identical, so no need for interpolation in this case. Is there maybe another way to achieve this?
Using `GmshRead` and `Init` with `ScalarField` did not result in a nice result when nodes are overlapping (something we'll look at when properly doing the interpolation for "cracked" meshes, this is just supposed to be a "hotfix" for now).
Many thanks!
Erikhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/130error: cannot convert ‘int*’ to ‘PetscInt*’2022-05-28T14:48:48Zgerard henryerror: cannot convert ‘int*’ to ‘PetscInt*’Hello all,
Compiling latest release 3.5.0 with petsc configured with "--with-64-bit-indices", we got these errors that stop the compilation, even with adding the flag "-fpermissive":
`
/home/henry/projets/getdp-3.5.0-source/src/kernel/...Hello all,
Compiling latest release 3.5.0 with petsc configured with "--with-64-bit-indices", we got these errors that stop the compilation, even with adding the flag "-fpermissive":
`
/home/henry/projets/getdp-3.5.0-source/src/kernel/EigenSolve_SLEPC.cpp:516:35: error: cannot convert ‘int*’ to ‘PetscInt*’ {aka ‘long int*’} 516 | _try(EPSGetIterationNumber(eps, &its)); | ^~~~ | | | int* In file included from /home/henry/projets/getdp-3.5.0-source/src/kernel/EigenSolve_SLEPC.cpp:48: /home/henry/projets/slepc-3.17.1-int8/include/slepceps.h:252:55: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘PetscErrorCode EPSGetIterationNumber(EPS, PetscInt*)’ 252 | SLEPC_EXTERN PetscErrorCode EPSGetIterationNumber(EPS,PetscInt*);
`
According to us, it seems that PetscInt needs "long int" but in the source, there is "int".
Thanks in advance for help,
Gérard & Gilleshttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/128openmp problem2022-05-19T13:36:41Zgerard henryopenmp problemHello all,
we got a problem when trying to use OpenMP, the release 3.4.0 always displays 1 thread, even setting OMP_NUM_THREADS to 16.
First, the source lacks the option "-nt <threads>" in the help
Second, is it normal that getdp forces ...Hello all,
we got a problem when trying to use OpenMP, the release 3.4.0 always displays 1 thread, even setting OMP_NUM_THREADS to 16.
First, the source lacks the option "-nt <threads>" in the help
Second, is it normal that getdp forces openmp to 1 thread when we set OMP_NUM_THREADS in the shell?
thanks in advance
Gérardhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/124Virtual Work implementation not clear2022-03-01T16:11:16ZDaniel GaleraVirtual Work implementation not clearI want to use the method of virtual works to calculate a force. I know there is a function in GetDP called `F_VirtualWork` in file `functions/F_Misc.cpp` so I tried to understand it in order to be sure of its usability. Nevertheless, I'm...I want to use the method of virtual works to calculate a force. I know there is a function in GetDP called `F_VirtualWork` in file `functions/F_Misc.cpp` so I tried to understand it in order to be sure of its usability. Nevertheless, I'm not sure if I do understand how it is implemented. I made some assumptions but they don't match with the code. I couldn't find something that matched with the code. Therefore, I write here my assumptions to see if someone finds an error in them or something in the implementation. To sum up, I don't understand why the `DetJac_dx` is computed that way and I don't understand the signs in the final calculation. Down below, what I understood:
The principle of virtual work for the electric or magnetic field can be expressed given the energy:
```math
W = \frac{\epsilon}{2}\int\limits_V \bf{E}\cdot \bf{E} dV
+ \frac{\mu}{2} \int\limits_V \bf{H}\cdot \bf{H} dV
```
Then virtual force in a direction $`p`$ can be expressed as
```math
F_p = \frac{\epsilon}{2}\frac{d}{d \bf{p}} \int_V \bf{E}\cdot \bf{E} d V
+ \frac{\mu}{2}\frac{d }{d \bf{p}} \int_V \bf{H}\cdot \bf{H} d V
```
If we take the integral term of the electric field (E) and apply the chain rule:
```math
F_{E,p} = \frac{\epsilon}{2}\frac{d }{d\bf{p}} \int\limits_V \bf{E}^2 d V =
\frac{\epsilon}{2}
\left[
\int\limits_V 2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}}\bf{E} d V
+
\int\limits_V \bf{E}^2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}} d V
\right]
```
Consider then, without coefficients:
```math
\frac{d }{d\bf{p}} \int\limits_V \bf{E}^2 d V =
\int\limits_V 2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}}\bf{E} d V
+
\int\limits_V \bf{E}^2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}} (d V)
= A + B
```
I understand that the function `F_VirtualWork` only takes into account B, so now we consider:
```math
F_{E,p} = \int\limits_V \bf{E}^2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}}( d V )
```
The contribution of a reference element $`K_e`$ to the force in direction $`\bf{p}`$
```math
F_{K_e} = \int\limits_{K_e }\bf{E}^2\frac{d }{d \bf{p}} (d K_e)
```
All articles and info that I could find about virtual work in the electric field take a paper from J. Coulomb and G. Meunier as reference (cited and the end of this text). In that article, the following derivative is defined (and not explained):
```math
\frac{d }{d \bf{s}} (dv) = |G|^{-1} \frac{d |G|}{d \bf{s}} \cdot dv
```
I suppose this expression is used in the code to express $`\frac{d }{d \bf{p}} (d K_e)`$ using `DetJac_dx[0]/DetJac`, `DetJac_dx[1]/DetJac` , `DetJac_dx[2]/DetJac`. But I don't really get how `DetJac_dx[i]` come from. I can deduce that this quantity can come from the solution of a system like:
```math
grad(DetJac) = grad(node\_basis\_functions) Adj(Jac)
```
Where `grad()` is the gradient and `Adj()` is the classical adjoint. But I can't understand where this comes from.
Then we need to compute square of the field, $`{E}=(E_{1},E_{2},E_{3})=E_{1}i+E_{2}j+E_{3}k`$. If we expressed it in its coordinates:
```math
{E}^2 = (E_{1}i+E_{2}j+E_{3}k)(E_{1}i+E_{2}j+E_{3}k) =E_{1}^2ii+E_{2}^2jj+E_{3}^kk+2E_{1}E_{2}ij+2E_{1}E_{3}ik+2E_{2}E_{3}jk
```
Considering `DetJac_dx/DetJac = D`, we have $`{D}=(D_{1},D_{2},D_{3})=D_{1}i+D_{2}j+D_{3}k`$. To get the force contribution $`F =(F_{1},F_{2},F_{3}) = {E}^2 D`$ :
```math
F = (D_{1}i+D_{2}j+D_{3}k)(E_{1}^2ii+E_{2}^2jj+E_{3}^kk+2E_{1}E_{2}ij+2E_{1}E_{3}ik+2E_{2}E_{3}jk)
```
For $`F_a = D_{1}i{E}^2`$:
```math
F_a = E_{1}^2 D_{1}iii+ E_{2}^2 D_{1}ijj+E_{3}^2 D_{1}ikk+ 2E_{1}E_{2} D_{1}iij + 2E_{1} E_{3} D_{1} iik + 2E_{2} E_{3} D_{1} ijk
```
Computing the directions:
```math
F_a = E_{1}^2 D_{1}i+E_{2}^2 D_{1}i+E_{3}^2 D_{1}i+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{1}j+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{1}k
```
For $`F_b =D_{2}i{E}^2`$ :
```math
F_b = E_{1}^2D_{2}jii+E_{2}^2D_{2}jjj+E_{3}^2 D_{2}jkk+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{2}jij+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{2}jik+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{2}jjk
```
Computing the directions:
```math
F_b = E_{1}^2 D_{1}j+E_{2}^2 D_{1}j+E_{3}^2 D_{1}j+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{2}i+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{2}k
```
For $`F_c =D_{3}i{E}^2`$:
```math
F_c = E_{1}^2D_{3}kii+E_{2}^2D_{3}kjj+E_{3}^2 D_{3}kkk+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{3}kij+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{3}kik+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{3}kjk
```
Computing the directions:
```math
F_c = E_{1}^2 D_{1}j+E_{2}^2 D_{1}j+E_{3}^2 D_{1}j+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{3}i+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{3}j
```
Then we arrange $`F = F_a+F_b+F_c = F_{1}i+F_{2}j+F_{3}k`$ and we have:
```math
F_1i = E_{1}^2 D_{1}i+E_{2}^2 D_{1}i+E_{3}^2 D_{1}i+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{2}i+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{3}i
```
```math
F_2j = E_{1}^2 D_{1}j+E_{2}^2 D_{1}j+E_{3}^2 D_{1}j+2E_{1}E_{2}D_{1}j+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{3}j
```
```math
F_3k = E_{1}^2 D_{1}k+E_{2}^2 D_{1}k+E_{3}^2 D_{1}k+2E_{1}E_{3}D_{1}k+2E_{2}E_{3}D_{2}k
```
The code in `F_VirtualWork` is similar, except for the signs. The only crazy idea that comes to my mind is that we take the sign of $`i,j,k`$ as negative so we have $`(i,j,k) = (-i_{new},-j_{new},-k_{new})`$ :
s[0] = (DetJac_dx[0] * (-squF[0] + squF[1] + squF[2]) -
2 * DetJac_dx[1] * squF[3] - 2 * DetJac_dx[2] * squF[5]) /
DetJac;
s[1] = (DetJac_dx[1] * (squF[0] - squF[1] + squF[2]) -
2 * DetJac_dx[0] * squF[3] - 2 * DetJac_dx[2] * squF[4]) /
DetJac;`
s[2] = (DetJac_dx[2] * (squF[0] + squF[1] - squF[2]) -
2 * DetJac_dx[0] * squF[5] - 2 * DetJac_dx[1] * squF[4]) /
DetJac;
J. Coulomb and G. Meunier, "Finite element implementation of virtual work principle for magnetic or electric force and torque computation," in IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 1894-1896, September 1984, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.1984.1063232.Ruth SabariegoRuth Sabariegohttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/123Question: vector of Form0 / Form1 quantities2022-03-01T16:09:16ZGuillaume DilasserQuestion: vector of Form0 / Form1 quantitiesDear all,
I am starting this Issue thread in order to ask a question regarding the best way to implement and do computation with a "vector" of Form0 / Form1 quantities (if this is something currently supported in GetDP).
I am consideri...Dear all,
I am starting this Issue thread in order to ask a question regarding the best way to implement and do computation with a "vector" of Form0 / Form1 quantities (if this is something currently supported in GetDP).
I am considering implementing the dynamical simulation of a set of several (let's say 2 to 10) coupled PDEs over a simple 1D domain. All the PDEs have the same structure and thus the set can be easily written as a single vectorized PDE supporting one unknown which is a vector with 2-10 coefficients. I have been trying to figure out the best way (if there is one at all) to implement the function spaces and the formulation in GetDP to achieve this. To be more precise: I don't know whether it is possible to group several quantities, all belonging to the same function space, in a vector / list so that the external derivative is applied to each one of them separately.
I hope that this very short summary of my problem gives you an accurate enough understanding of what I am trying to achieve but I am absolutely ready to give further explanations should they be needed. I would be deeply thankful if someone could tell me whether that kind of problem if suited for GetDP or not and point me towards any existing example of implementation.
Sincerely Yours,https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/119Linear elasticity: returning of on mass normalized eigenvectors2022-01-14T08:19:11ZDapu ZhangLinear elasticity: returning of on mass normalized eigenvectorsHi,
generally, I'd like to perform an undamped modal analysis and get the on mass normalized eigenvectors. I noticed, if I use the template of the modal analysis, I will get the displacement vector, but it is not on mass normalized. Am...Hi,
generally, I'd like to perform an undamped modal analysis and get the on mass normalized eigenvectors. I noticed, if I use the template of the modal analysis, I will get the displacement vector, but it is not on mass normalized. Am I right? I saw in the source code, the slepc solver returns the eigenvectors in the L2 norm and getdp renormalizes them in L infty norm. <br/>
I understand it is possible to print out the system matrix and get the mass matrix. But it actually makes better sense to me, if one could get the on mass normalized eigenvectors after a modal analysis. Is it possible that getdp could provide it as a postoperation? Thank you! <br/>
Best Regards <br/>
Dapu Zhang<br/>
Leibniz University Hannover<br/>
Welfengarten 1, 30167 Hannover<br/>
Germanyhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/1173D Moving Band2022-03-25T10:58:51ZViktor -3D Moving BandRelated to #76.
Hello @Theom ,
were you able to find a solution for the 3d moving band, or do you remesh as suggested by @geuzaine ? I am trying as well to model axial flux machines, but I am still quiet on the beginning of understandin...Related to #76.
Hello @Theom ,
were you able to find a solution for the 3d moving band, or do you remesh as suggested by @geuzaine ? I am trying as well to model axial flux machines, but I am still quiet on the beginning of understanding onelabs concepts. Perhaps you can provide an example?
Best regards,
Viktorhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/112Get values of time series with Julia-API2022-01-03T10:38:00ZGeroldGet values of time series with Julia-APIHello,
with the gmsh.jl API I'm trying to receive the results (all the steps) of an electric machine simulation in the time domain (similar to the pmsm.pro example). I set up the communication with Julia so far and I'm able to run the F...Hello,
with the gmsh.jl API I'm trying to receive the results (all the steps) of an electric machine simulation in the time domain (similar to the pmsm.pro example). I set up the communication with Julia so far and I'm able to run the FEM calculation.
```julia
gmsh.initialize()
c = gmsh.onelab
path = "./"
machine = "machine_model"
machine_geo = path * machine * ".geo"
machine_msh = path * machine * ".msh"
machine_pro = path * machine * ".pro"
mygetdp = gmsh.option.getString("Solver.Executable0")
Id = [-100]
c.setNumber("Input/50Id stator current", Id)
c.run("ID_" * string(Int(Id)), mygetdp * " " * machine_pro * " -msh "
* machine_msh * " -solve -v 0 -setnumber Flag_PrintFields 0")
torque = c.getNumber("Output - Mechanics/0Torque [Nm]/rotor")
```
The problem is, that I get only the result of last time step, although the simulation is in the time domain. I also tried `c.get()`, but then I have to parse with JSON, which is much slower. In the electric machine template "machine_magstadyn_a.pro" I didn't figure it out, how I can use the `SendToServer` command without the option `LastTimeStepOnly`.
Is there a possibility to receive the vector of a parameter over all time steps of the simulation?
Best regards,
Geroldhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/111force density on stator ring2022-01-09T09:10:03ZMarc Schöningforce density on stator ringHi all,
I have a small problem to calculate the force density on a stator ring of an inner rotor airgap winding.
Here is the cross section:
![geo_commented](/uploads/a4830751037fd75409d0df109139852f/geo_commented.png)
I work on base o...Hi all,
I have a small problem to calculate the force density on a stator ring of an inner rotor airgap winding.
Here is the cross section:
![geo_commented](/uploads/a4830751037fd75409d0df109139852f/geo_commented.png)
I work on base of the machine_magstadyn_a.pro and placed a Physical Line on the inner stator diameter and added it as Region to a Domain called DomainLineForce. Then there is a new Postprocessing:
{ Name LineForce;
Value {
Term { [ (T_max[{d a}] * XYZ[]) ];
In Domain; Jacobian Vol; }
}
}
and finally a PostOperation:
Print[ LineForce, OnGrid DomainLineForce, File "LineForce.pos", LastTimeStepOnly, AppendTimeStepToFileName 1];
The result is here:
![result](/uploads/7ad5955a032552488a274e1ff6eb5661/result.png)
What surprises me is, that according to theory, I would expect the force vector to point to the airgap with low permeability and not to the stator yoke with high permeability.
Did I messed up the Postprocessing equation?
Thanks in advance.https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/110Auto-symmetrization of Galerkin terms2023-09-22T07:24:04ZChristophe GeuzaineAuto-symmetrization of Galerkin termsWe should fix the auto-symmetrization of terms by being "safe", i.e. only auto-symmetrize with tensor-valued functions if the term involves symmetric tensors.
See https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/blob/master/Kernel/Cal_GalerkinT...We should fix the auto-symmetrization of terms by being "safe", i.e. only auto-symmetrize with tensor-valued functions if the term involves symmetric tensors.
See https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/blob/master/Kernel/Cal_GalerkinTermOfFemEquation.cpp#L72
@julien.dularhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/107getdp linear elasticity -- modal analysis (example wanted)2021-11-18T14:44:55ZAlexander Shendigetdp linear elasticity -- modal analysis (example wanted)I think I have now understood the format of the .pre file. But I'm still having problems with 3D modal analysis (eigenvalue problem K - omega^2*M).
* I haven't been able to find a suitable example for modal analysis except
except for t...I think I have now understood the format of the .pre file. But I'm still having problems with 3D modal analysis (eigenvalue problem K - omega^2*M).
* I haven't been able to find a suitable example for modal analysis except
except for the magnetometer and that has an additional term (I am assuming due
to piezoelectric effects?) that isn't applicable to my case.
* I am using a file Lib_Elasticity_u.pro. I must have
obtained this file from somewhere on onelab.info but I
don't know exactly from where. However in this file
there is a term "Integral { DtDtDof [ -rho[] * Dof{ux}
, {ux} ];", whereas in the magnetometer example
the minus sign is missing.
Is there someone who can shed some light on this or
point me to an appropriate example?
PS: I'm sorry, if I sound confused. It is because I *really* am.
I am attaching the mentioned file: [Lib_Elasticity_u.pro](/uploads/ff11c1d86346ce5cd369cf8f1f526a8a/Lib_Elasticity_u.pro)https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/103Questions about the ’link‘ function2021-10-19T21:23:12ZJie LiQuestions about the ’link‘ functionHallo,
I found that the stator and winding are separated after modeling. I saw the syntax LINK in the tutorial, and my understanding is to use LINK to restrict the stator and winding contact surfaces to the same degree of freedom, but I ...Hallo,
I found that the stator and winding are separated after modeling. I saw the syntax LINK in the tutorial, and my understanding is to use LINK to restrict the stator and winding contact surfaces to the same degree of freedom, but I don't know how to implement this function.
Do you have any corresponding examples?
Best Wishes
Jiehttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/101Unable to compile with Visual Studio 20192021-10-04T20:03:55ZDheeraj KumarUnable to compile with Visual Studio 2019I have the Intel Fortran compiler installed. However, I am getting the following error:
`-- The Fortran compiler identification is Intel 2021.4.0.20210910
-- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info
-- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info - f...I have the Intel Fortran compiler installed. However, I am getting the following error:
`-- The Fortran compiler identification is Intel 2021.4.0.20210910
-- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info
-- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info - failed
-- Check for working Fortran compiler: C:/Program Files (x86)/Intel/oneAPI/compiler/2021.4.0/windows/bin/intel64/ifort.exe
-- Check for working Fortran compiler: C:/Program Files (x86)/Intel/oneAPI/compiler/2021.4.0/windows/bin/intel64/ifort.exe - broken
CMake Error at C:/Program Files/CMake/share/cmake-3.21/Modules/CMakeTestFortranCompiler.cmake:54 (message):
The Fortran compiler
"C:/Program Files (x86)/Intel/oneAPI/compiler/2021.4.0/windows/bin/intel64/ifort.exe"
is not able to compile a simple test program.
It fails with the following output:
Change Dir: C:/Users/*/source/repos/getdp/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp
Run Build Command(s):C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio/2019/Community/Common7/IDE/devenv.com CMAKE_TRY_COMPILE.sln /build Debug /project cmTC_34aef &&
Microsoft Visual Studio 2019 Version 16.11.3.
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. All rights reserved.
Package 'IFLangServicePackage' failed to load.`https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/100issue about template2021-10-21T22:56:14ZJie Liissue about templateHallo,
When I run the template you gave me (interactive_Elasticity.pro) as instructed, it pops up with the following:![issue](/uploads/c024fa973bf8e5f0a29a1d51bbc1ce09/issue.png). It shows:Error:GetDP- Unable to open file'D:/getdp/Intera...Hallo,
When I run the template you gave me (interactive_Elasticity.pro) as instructed, it pops up with the following:![issue](/uploads/c024fa973bf8e5f0a29a1d51bbc1ce09/issue.png). It shows:Error:GetDP- Unable to open file'D:/getdp/Interactive_Elasticity.**msh**'Is there any solution to this please?
best wishes
Jiehttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/98Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2' with no Form2 in function space setup2023-02-20T18:42:36ZTheo MessinNull determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2' with no Form2 in function space setupHello,
I get `Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2'` errors in only some (3D electromagnetic) simulation cases (not all...)
However my functionspace setup only uses scalar, form0, form1 types and my integration points look like:
`...Hello,
I get `Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2'` errors in only some (3D electromagnetic) simulation cases (not all...)
However my functionspace setup only uses scalar, form0, form1 types and my integration points look like:
`{ Type Gauss ;`
`Case {{ GeoElement Triangle ; NumberOfPoints 4 ; }`
` { GeoElement Quadrangle ; NumberOfPoints 4 ; }`
` { GeoElement Tetrahedron ; NumberOfPoints 4 ; }`
` { GeoElement Hexahedron ; NumberOfPoints 6 ; }`
` { GeoElement Pyramid ; NumberOfPoints 8 ; }`
` { GeoElement Prism ; NumberOfPoints 9 ; }`
`}}`
The code snippet called that pops up the error is : [gitlab Get_Geometry.cpp](https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/blob/master/Kernel/Get_Geometry.cpp)
Does anyone have an idea why this occurs and how to solve the issue?
Regards,
Theo
Setup: getdp ran from prompt or gmsh gui on windows 10 and windows server (2012+)https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/97Unknown number option during getdp call2021-08-11T10:34:38ZTheo MessinUnknown number option during getdp callHello,
While running getdp from the console (windows 10), I keep on getting the following errors, the getdp call continues and gives valid results.
`Unknown number option 'General.AbortOnError'`
`Error : Unknown number option 'Geomet...Hello,
While running getdp from the console (windows 10), I keep on getting the following errors, the getdp call continues and gives valid results.
`Unknown number option 'General.AbortOnError'`
`Error : Unknown number option 'Geometry.Curves'`
`Error : Unknown color option 'Mesh.Nodes'`
Even if setting `SetNumber["General.AbortOnError", 3];` in the .pro file or calling getdp with `-setnumber General.AbortOnError 3`
These Number options are well defined in the gmsh GUI interface.
Thanks in advance for any advice
Regards,
Theohttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/92Error : Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2P'2021-07-19T18:40:19ZPeter KisError : Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2P'An error is generated in [Magnetostatics example](https://getdp.info/doc/texinfo/getdp.html#Magnetostatic-problem) in AxiSymmetric case, when VolAxiSquSphShell and VolAxiSqu Jacobians are used.
The problem is at curl computation in PostP...An error is generated in [Magnetostatics example](https://getdp.info/doc/texinfo/getdp.html#Magnetostatic-problem) in AxiSymmetric case, when VolAxiSquSphShell and VolAxiSqu Jacobians are used.
The problem is at curl computation in PostProcessing part. I don't see the error message for other Jacobians.
Error : Null determinant in 'ChangeOfCoord_Form2P'https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/90Time dependent permittivity/permeability2021-07-09T07:27:47ZJules KoenigTime dependent permittivity/permeabilityHello,
I am following up on the questions I have already asked you here : [How to create time varying material property ?](https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/1302)
I need more clarification if possible.
I am working on a pr...Hello,
I am following up on the questions I have already asked you here : [How to create time varying material property ?](https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/1302)
I need more clarification if possible.
I am working on a project where we study the propagation of an electromagnetic wave in a medium where the dielectric permittivity and the magnetic permeability vary according to time and space.
The problem consists of a rectangle where there is a sinusoidal electric field excitation on the left edge, PMC conditions on the top and bottom edges and an absorbing condition on the right edge (cf. image). The wave crosses 3 media with the following properties :
1. ε0, μ0
2. ε = ε(x,t) = ε0*(εr0+δε*cos(ωt-kx)), μ = μ(x,t) = μ0*(μr0+δμ*cos(ωt-kx))
3. ε0, μ0
![Capture1](/uploads/44f3a0d4d9a4520ef2fe66cc4ab95057/Capture1.JPG)
I wish to adapt the variational formulation for this problem but I have some difficulties. Here is my weak formulation :
![Capture2](/uploads/75c721a893a95b3ef4abd9bdffa00cdc/Capture2.JPG)
My questions are therefore:
1. Is it enough to take into account the electric excitation on the left edge as a constraint? Or should we add a term in the variational formulation?
2. I don't see the possibility of writing the Laplacian operator, is there one? If not, do I have to go through a Green formula?
3. How to write the temporal derivatives? I understand that "DtDof" only applies to the unknown in "Dof" and we cannot use "Dt".
4. I have defined permittivity and permeability in "Function" as follows:
`epsilon [Domain 1] = eps0;`
`epsilon [Domain 2] = eps0 * (epsr0 + d_eps*Cos[w*$Time-k*X[]];`
`epsilon [Domain 3] = eps0;`
Is this the right way to go? I used X[] instead of $X because $X didn't seem to work.
5. Should we work in BF_Node or in BF_PerpendicularEdge?
Best regards,
KOENIG Juleshttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/88Elasticity Module - Deformed Edge Length2021-07-12T20:01:24ZKeegan JauchElasticity Module - Deformed Edge LengthHi,
I am applying the Onelab module to solve elastic static structural simulations. Is there a way to return the deformed length of a physical curve after GetDP runs the simulation? I have looked through the documentation and have no...Hi,
I am applying the Onelab module to solve elastic static structural simulations. Is there a way to return the deformed length of a physical curve after GetDP runs the simulation? I have looked through the documentation and have not found a way to do this.
Thanks!
Keeganhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/81Computation times on Linux aarch64 vs OpenBSD amd642021-05-14T12:34:55ZAlexander ShendiComputation times on Linux aarch64 vs OpenBSD amd64Hello gentle getdp folks,
I have observed rather lqrge (ca. one order of magnitude) differences in calculation times (both wall and cpu). See the attached text file for more details.
The times reported are:
1. Start of program
2. After...Hello gentle getdp folks,
I have observed rather lqrge (ca. one order of magnitude) differences in calculation times (both wall and cpu). See the attached text file for more details.
The times reported are:
1. Start of program
2. After eigenvalue calculation
3. After Postprocessing
4. End of program
There seems to a difference between wall clock time and cpu time during postprocessing on OpenBSD. On OpenBSD I moved the calculation directory
to a RAM disk, but that didn't help much.
I'm mainly looking for further hints on how to proceed with debugging
the problem. I will also be glad to supply further information,
if needed.
Attachements:
[out.001.txt](/uploads/5fb77a75e989c2dc3dc2e9c35a56e17d/out.001.txt)![OpenBSD_und_Linux](/uploads/30e2f37946800e7e1ef54a56f0de71fa/OpenBSD_und_Linux.png)