[Kratos] problem with tetrahedral_mesh_orientation_check.h revision 12415

Riccardo Rossi rrossi en cimne.upc.edu
Vie Oct 9 15:02:03 CEST 2015


Hi Micheal,

indeed you are right, the current version of the orientation function
requires the face to be in the same mpi process as the element it
corresponds to. the crucial point is that to be able to check the
orientation of the face i am now checking the elements it belongs to
instead of the nodal normal

there are both good and bad implications about this:
GOOD NEWS: it should be much more reliable than the oldo ne
BAD NEWS: it requires the conditions to be assigned to the same partition
as the element (as you observe)

in order to have the correct positioning of the conditions one should just
add a "True" at the end of the partitioning function, hence calling the one
you wrote.

if you have any better solution i'll be glad to hear it...

cheers
Riccardo

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Andre, Michael <michael.andre en tum.de> wrote:

> Hi Riccardo,
>
>
> I have an issue with the commit you did:
>
>
> *adding local flags to the processes*
> *------------------------------------------------------------------------*
> *r12415 | rrossi | 2015-09-17 10:37:47 +0200 (Thu, 17 Sep 2015) | 1 line*
>
>
> The added lines:
>
>
> *if(itCond->IsNot(VISITED) )*
> *             {*
> *-                rGeom(0).swap(rGeom(1));*
> *-                CondSwitchCount++;*
> *+                KRATOS_THROW_ERROR(std::runtime_error,*
> *+                                   "Found a condition without any
> corresponding element. ID of condition = ", itCond->Id());*
> *             }*
>
> appear to check if a condition was visited during the element face
> orientation check and throw an error if this is not the case. In MPI the
> (wall) conditions do not have to be on the same partition as
> the element. This error message is appearing when I try running a MPI
> problem. There is an option to force conditions to go to the same partition
> as a parent element (I use this for my wall function) and when I activate
> this, the error does not appear, but in general I don't think this error
> message should be called. Is there a reason why it is needed?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 


*Riccardo Rossi*

PhD, Civil Engineer


member of the Kratos Team: www.cimne.com/kratos

lecturer at Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, BarcelonaTech (UPC)

Research fellow at International Center for Numerical Methods in
Engineering (CIMNE)


C/ Gran Capità, s/n, Campus Nord UPC, Ed. C1, Despatx C9

08034 – Barcelona – Spain – www.cimne.com  -

T.(+34) 93 401 56 96 skype: *rougered4*



<http://www.cimne.com/>

<https://www.facebook.com/cimne> <http://blog.cimne.com/>
<http://vimeo.com/cimne> <http://www.youtube.com/user/CIMNEvideos>
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/cimne> <https://twitter.com/cimne>

Les dades personals contingudes en aquest missatge són tractades amb la
finalitat de mantenir el contacte professional entre CIMNE i voste. Podra
exercir els drets d'accés, rectificació, cancel·lació i oposició,
dirigint-se a cimne en cimne.upc.edu. La utilització de la seva adreça de
correu electronic per part de CIMNE queda subjecte a les disposicions de la
Llei 34/2002, de Serveis de la Societat de la Informació i el Comerç
Electronic.

 Imprimiu aquest missatge, només si és estrictament necessari.
<http://www.cimne.com/>
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: http://listas.cimne.upc.edu/pipermail/kratos/attachments/20151009/f214e689/attachment.htm 


Más información sobre la lista de distribución Kratos