| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
Shawn Walker wrote:
I understand what you are saying, but the ordering of the vertices is such that the first three vertices (0,1,2) are exactly the same as they were before. This would be done no matter what order polynomial map you used. So, it seems to me it should be fine.
This is the usual FEM approach, but the point as I see it is that a vertex should really be a vertex. If it's not, it becomes a slippery slope with ad-hoc extensions. It would be nice to come up with a solution which is more elegant and extensible than the usual approach.
Garth
However, to be sure, I can modify the ufc stuff such that the coordinates variable only reads in the first three vertices. So this would be EXACTLY as it was before. I would then create a new ufc::cell variable called `map_coordinates' (if you have a better name, please suggest) and this would read in the 6 vertices. And in Tabulate_Tensor, if higher order is desired, then the `map_coordinates' will be used to compute the FEM matrix.This seems safe, though a little redundant. Of course, one must be careful when creating the higher order mesh .xml file and ensure that the first three vertices correspond to the usual triangle vertices.I also want to make sure that the extra `map_coordinates' is available to be modified with a loop in dolfin. This would be necessary for an ALE method when the mesh is deforming.- Shawn On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Anders Logg wrote:On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 07:15:06PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:Anders Logg wrote:I'm not sure this will work. If you attach 6 vertices to a triangle by <triangle index="0" affine="false" v0="0" v1="1" v2="2" v3="4" v4="5" v5="6"/> then all sorts of things will break (I imagine). A triangle always has three vertices.I noticed this too. It would make some things troublesome.The geometry of the triangles is separate. Maybe we could just add extra data which could be "control points" for the cell facets? For P2 it would be the edge/face midpoints.I like the idea of defining facet data which would contain the necessary info.A problem with defining facet data is that the facet numbering is not known a priori. It depends on the algorithm used by DOLFIN to compute the facets from the cells. So we can't store for example a mesh function over the facets since the facet numbering may change. When we read input from VMTK, we need to read facet data (boundary markers) and these are stored relative to the cell to which the facet belongs and the local number of the facet relative to the cell (which is unique). There is an example in data/meshes/aneurysm.xml.gz. -- Anders_______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
