-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
PetscFE determines basis for examples/fluids/navierstokes #1264
Conversation
TODO:
|
In the failing tests I see @jedbrown how do you propose we resolve this? Is there a way to communicate this request to PETSc? |
I'm guessing we probably just need to change: libCEED/examples/fluids/src/setupdm.c Line 53 in 51f8a93
from PETSC_DECIDE to the actual quadrature order we want. See PETSc docs
|
Yeah, see how |
- Should factor in q_extra
Co-authored-by: Jeremy L Thompson <[email protected]>
- Small, insignificant changes to the coordinate locations make a dramatic difference to the initial condition - For the test case, there is a node right at the midpoint of the domain. Adding the epsilon fudge factor makes the if statement more stable
- Change the test so that it passes on all hardware. It's a very sentitive test and the changes to the basis creation changed the initial conditions *just* enough to make the test not happy. Should really try and make this more robust at some point...
As we prepare to bring simplex meshes into the examples/fluids/navierstokes application within libCEED, it is important to let PETSc define the basis functions. This code revision followed similar work done in Ratel to address this issue.
This has been completed at this point for the primary operators but not for the Data/Learning extensions but hopefully those will be resolved within this PR.
As all changes are within examples/fluids and off of a current main, all tests of libCEED should still pass.
As the work mimicked Ratel development (and work from a branch of Rezgar Shekeri) to acquire the basis information from PETSc, credit should go those efforts while responsibility for miss-interpretations of that effort belong to Kenneth Jansen with co-author help from James Wright.
At this time the fluids example has been verified correct without loss of computational efficiency on Polaris in both serial and parallel including STG with Q1, Q2, and Q3 elements. Further tests with simplex elements are ongoing and updates will be provided as they become available.