getdp issueshttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues2021-12-23T09:56:22Zhttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/108Fails to compile due to missing include of cstring in Kernel/Operation_Broadc...2021-12-23T09:56:22ZJakob LellFails to compile due to missing include of cstring in Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cppTrying to compile getdp from source (on an Ubuntu 20.04 system) fails due to a missing include of `<cstring>` in `Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cpp`.
How to reproduce:
```
git clone https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp.git
cd getdp
mkdir...Trying to compile getdp from source (on an Ubuntu 20.04 system) fails due to a missing include of `<cstring>` in `Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cpp`.
How to reproduce:
```
git clone https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp.git
cd getdp
mkdir build
cd build
cmake ..
make -j4
```
This will result in the following error message:
```
/tmp/getdp/Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cpp:60:15: error: ‘strncpy’ was not declared in this scope
60 | strncpy(sidj, s, sizeof(sidj));
| ^~~~~~~
/tmp/getdp/Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cpp:25:1: note: ‘strncpy’ is defined in header ‘<cstring>’; did you forget to ‘#include <cstring>’?
```
Adding the line `#include <cstring>` in the beginning of `Kernel/Operation_Broadcast.cpp` will indeed fix the problem.https://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/106Electromagnetism: output flux density elementwise2021-11-06T08:54:18ZDapu ZhangElectromagnetism: output flux density elementwiseHi, dear GetDP users,
are there any ways to do that? It would be very helpful in the simulation of electrical machines, for example, computing the airgap flux density or calculating the iron losses. I knew the `OnGrid` Operation, for e...Hi, dear GetDP users,
are there any ways to do that? It would be very helpful in the simulation of electrical machines, for example, computing the airgap flux density or calculating the iron losses. I knew the `OnGrid` Operation, for example, I can use the `onGrid` operation to get the flux density along a circular line, but it might cause interpolation's problem. Please take a look at the issue that I opened [issue#9](https://gitlab.onelab.info/doc/models/-/issues/9). And with using the `ElementTable` and `OnElementOf` operation to output the flux density into a .dat file, it didn't work well, because the exported flux density are corresponding to the nodes in the `ElementTable`. Does anyone has a solution to this problem? Thanks in advance.
Dapu from Hannover, Germany.
Email: dapu.zhang@ial.uni-hannover.dehttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/105Question about current density in solid conductor2022-11-23T13:24:34ZJan WiegardQuestion about current density in solid conductorHi,
I am new to GetDP and want to simulate an inductor. So far, I am just able to simulate stranded windings with homogeny current density in the frequency domain (your inductor.pro example was very helpful). Now I planned to measure th...Hi,
I am new to GetDP and want to simulate an inductor. So far, I am just able to simulate stranded windings with homogeny current density in the frequency domain (your inductor.pro example was very helpful). Now I planned to measure the skin and proximity effect.
I started with the definition of a current density in a solid conductor but get stuck…
Does someone of you have a small solver for a solid conductor with implemented current density I can begin with? Or maybe a link to some code?https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/104Error : GetDP - PETSc error: Unable to open file2023-10-19T12:25:55ZButrint AvdijajError : GetDP - PETSc error: Unable to open filehttps://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/102petsc openmpi check fail2021-12-23T09:58:09ZYun Liupetsc openmpi check failWhen trying to compile getdp with the same openmpi configuration as petsc, the configuration check will fail due to some minor differences. Maybe this check is too stringent?
```
In file included from /home/yl398/bin/petsc-v3.16.0/incl...When trying to compile getdp with the same openmpi configuration as petsc, the configuration check will fail due to some minor differences. Maybe this check is too stringent?
```
In file included from /home/yl398/bin/petsc-v3.16.0/include/petscbag.h:4,
from /home/yl398/bin/petsc-v3.16.0/include/petsc.h:5,
from /home/yl398/bin/getdp-3.4.0/Common/Message.cpp:36:
/home/yl398/bin/petsc-v3.16.0/include/petscsys.h:241:6: error: #error "PETSc was configured with one OpenMPI mpi.h version but now appears to be compiling using a different OpenMPI mpi.h version"
241 | # error "PETSc was configured with one OpenMPI mpi.h version but now appears to be compiling using a different OpenMPI mpi.h version"
| ^~~~~
In file included from /usr/include/python2.7/pyconfig.h:6,
from /usr/include/python2.7/Python.h:8,
from /home/yl398/bin/getdp-3.4.0/Common/Message.cpp:60:
/usr/include/python2.7/pyconfig-64.h:1191: warning: "_POSIX_C_SOURCE" redefined
1191 | #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200112L
|
In file included from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/os_defines.h:39,
from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/c++config.h:524,
from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/clocale:41,
from /home/yl398/bin/getdp-3.4.0/Common/Message.cpp:6:
/usr/include/features.h:168: note: this is the location of the previous definition
168 | # define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200809L
|
In file included from /usr/include/python2.7/pyconfig.h:6,
from /usr/include/python2.7/Python.h:8,
from /home/yl398/bin/getdp-3.4.0/Common/Message.cpp:60:
/usr/include/python2.7/pyconfig-64.h:1213: warning: "_XOPEN_SOURCE" redefined
1213 | #define _XOPEN_SOURCE 600
|
In file included from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/os_defines.h:39,
from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/c++config.h:524,
from /usr/local/software/archive/linux-scientific7-x86_64/gcc-9/gcc-9.3.0-qszxcci5frtw4aul3m44oarpvxzyrgpp/include/c++/9.3.0/clocale:41,
from /home/yl398/bin/getdp-3.4.0/Common/Message.cpp:6:
/usr/include/features.h:170: note: this is the location of the previous definition
170 | # define _XOPEN_SOURCE 700
|
make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/getdp.dir/Common/Message.cpp.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/getdp.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
```https://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/99use getdp for STL. or STEP. files2021-09-15T21:20:21ZJie Liuse getdp for STL. or STEP. filesHallo,
can I use getdp for solving STL or STEP files if they are optimised? Do I need to use the interface to define each physical surface and then set the parameters in getdp?
best wishes
JHallo,
can I use getdp for solving STL or STEP files if they are optimised? Do I need to use the interface to define each physical surface and then set the parameters in getdp?
best wishes
Jhttps://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/96Symmetry plane for 3D Magnetostatic2021-08-26T09:43:34ZTheo MessinSymmetry plane for 3D MagnetostaticHello,
In order to save computational resources, symmetries can easily be used with getdp (master-slave link).
Considering a 2 stators - 1 rotor axial flux machine, there is a symmetry that can be used: Simulating one stator and half o...Hello,
In order to save computational resources, symmetries can easily be used with getdp (master-slave link).
Considering a 2 stators - 1 rotor axial flux machine, there is a symmetry that can be used: Simulating one stator and half of the rotor should be sufficient. The symmetry plane cuts the rotor in half.
However I have not seen such implementation.
How can such an (anti)symmetric plane be implemented with getdp's A-v formulation?
Best Regards,
Theohttps://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/95.pre file format documentation2021-11-18T13:11:43ZAlexander Shendi.pre file format documentationHello,
I am using getdp for a modal analysis of a motor stator and housing. Currently I have a model with first order tetrahedra and 24385 nodes.
I need a mapping from Node Number (1 .. 24385) and DOF (one of {UX, UY, UZ, ROTX, ROTY, RO...Hello,
I am using getdp for a modal analysis of a motor stator and housing. Currently I have a model with first order tetrahedra and 24385 nodes.
I need a mapping from Node Number (1 .. 24385) and DOF (one of {UX, UY, UZ, ROTX, ROTY, ROTZ}) to DOF number (1 .. 142278). I should be able to generate that mapping from the .pre file, but don't understand the format (Appendix A.2.2 is no big help either). At least the number of all DOF (constrained and non-constrained) is
> 146310 = 6×24385 = 6×nnodes.
Thank you in advance for your help.https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/94getdp .pre file format documentation2021-07-15T12:01:26ZAlexander Shendigetdp .pre file format documentationHello,
I am using getdp for a modal analysis of a motor stator and housing. Currently I have a model with first order tetrahedra and 24385 nodes.
I need a mapping from Node Number (1 .. 24385) and DOF (one of {UX, UY, UZ, ROTX, ROTY, RO...Hello,
I am using getdp for a modal analysis of a motor stator and housing. Currently I have a model with first order tetrahedra and 24385 nodes.
I need a mapping from Node Number (1 .. 24385) and DOF (one of {UX, UY, UZ, ROTX, ROTY, ROTZ}) to DOF number (1 .. 142278). I should be able to generate that mapping from the .pre file, but don't understand the format (Appendix A.2.2 is no big help either). At least the number of all DOF (constrained and non-constrained) is 146310 = 6*24385 = 6*nnodes.
Thank you in advance for your help.https://gitlab.onelab.info/getdp/getdp/-/issues/93Boolean Union Operation2021-07-30T07:12:23ZMahdi MMTBoolean Union Operationhttps://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/91Could I please have an answer for #822021-07-09T06:38:05ZAlexander ShendiCould I please have an answer for #82Sorry to create a new issue.
I would still like an answer to #82. What is exactly in the *.m and *.bin files? Whom could I please contact by email? Many thanks in advance. Have a great day.Sorry to create a new issue.
I would still like an answer to #82. What is exactly in the *.m and *.bin files? Whom could I please contact by email? Many thanks in advance. Have a great day.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/89Clash between Eigen and GetDP defines2021-06-10T11:56:27ZAnthony RoyerClash between Eigen and GetDP definesThere is a clash between defines in GetDP and Eigen on NIC5 when optimization flags (-march=native) are activated.
Modules:
```
module load releases/2020b
module load foss/2020b
module load CMake/3.18.4-GCCcore-10.2.0
module load Boos...There is a clash between defines in GetDP and Eigen on NIC5 when optimization flags (-march=native) are activated.
Modules:
```
module load releases/2020b
module load foss/2020b
module load CMake/3.18.4-GCCcore-10.2.0
module load Boost/1.74.0-GCC-10.2.0
module load Python/3.8.6-GCCcore-10.2.0
module load Eigen/3.3.8-GCCcore-10.2.0
```
Error:
```
Dans le fichier inclus depuis /home/ulg/ace/ndavi/getdp/Functions/BF_Node.cpp:11:
/home/ulg/ace/ndavi/getdp/contrib/eigen/Eigen/src/Core/arch/AVX/Complex.h: Dans la fonction « void Eigen::internal::ptranspose(Eigen::internal::PacketBlock<Eigen::internal::Packet4cf, 4>&) »:
/home/ulg/ace/ndavi/getdp/Interface/ProData.h:1766:12: erreur: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
1766 | #define P1 1
| ^
/home/ulg/ace/ndavi/getdp/contrib/eigen/Eigen/src/Core/arch/AVX/Complex.h:405:11: note: dans l'expansion de la macro « P1 »
405 | __m256d P1 = _mm256_castps_pd(kernel.packet[1].v);
|
```Christophe GeuzaineChristophe Geuzaine