Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
The geometry engine is a missing piece in FEniCS, which we have not got to yet. But of course this should be done. Today we only work with a given mesh, which may have been generated from a complicated CAD geometry in the first place (we have more comlex geometries that cylinders, for example a full model of a car), but today the original geometry description is not used in mesh refinement/movement; if the mesh is refined/moved, no update is made with respect to the original geometry. But as I said, this is what we want. In an old code I added these things manually, but for DOLFIN we want to take a general approach. We have a project running now on fluid-structure interaction (FSI) with ALE where the mesh is moving. I have attached a few movies from preliminary tests on model problems of ALE for the flow part, we are currently working on the full FSI problem. The standard approach to FSI is (as you say) to iterate between a fluid and structure solver in one way or another; for refs. see e.g. the group of Alfio Quarteroni in Lausanne/Milan. In our project we are trying a somewhat different approach, which I will keep you updated on (e.g. through the fenics-list), and the algorithms will be implemented in DOLFIN, in an experimental version rather soon I hope. We also have a project in collision of cars for animation/simulators, where the goal is real time and interactivity. For a flow problem I'd say that the computational cost is today still too significant for interatcivity of a reasonably fine model, but that we should be able to address in the future I think, in particular with a superfast Stillwater machine... /Johan > CAD geometry is specified in terms of primitive shapes and Boolean operators. A "geometry engine" is the black box that defines some set of primitives and operators to construct arbitrary shapes and the ability to > determine if a point is inside/outside or on the surface. Typically the geometry engine also provides the ability to extract a surface mesh for display. > > I am becoming comfortable with the task of generating a mesh generator (or > better said: rip one off from CGAL or CAMAL), and I understand the GUI issues. I don't comprehend the amount of work of the other two you mentioned: the variational formulation and the solver. The solution I was > thinking along is that of a two domain solver where one iteratively solves > the fluid flow, extracts the boundary conditions, and applies them to the > structure. I haven't found any material that describes a coupled system yet. > Are you aware of such a reference? > > Theo > > -----Original Message----- > From: fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] > On Behalf Of 'Anders Logg' > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 4:12 PM > To: fenics-dev@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [FEniCS-dev] AMR > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 04:08:15PM -0500, Theodore Omtzigt wrote: >> Yes, but putting the pieces together to make that happen would be non-trivial. >> /Anders >> Is it non-trivial due to the lack of a geometry engine, or the lack of moving grid functionality, or something else? >> Theo > > I don't really know what you mean by "geometry engine", but you will have to write a substantial amount of code to put everything together: mesh, variational formulation of the fluid-structure interaction problem, solvers etc, not to mention the graphical user interface for interacting with the mesh. > > /Anders > _______________________________________________ > FEniCS-dev mailing list > FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev > > _______________________________________________ > FEniCS-dev mailing list > FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev >
Attachment:
ale.mpg
Description: application/unknown
Attachment:
mesh_pinch_move_velocity.mpg
Description: application/unknown
Attachment:
mesh_pinch_velocity.mpg
Description: application/unknown
Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |