Skip to content
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

Refactor InterfaceCoupling #126

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 11, 2022
Merged

Refactor InterfaceCoupling #126

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 11, 2022

Conversation

peterrum
Copy link
Member

@peterrum peterrum commented Jan 6, 2022

...so that it uses dealii::Utilities::MPI::RemotePointEvaluation.

depends on dealii/dealii#13173, dealii/dealii#13177, dealii/dealii#13178, dealii/dealii#13187, #127

@kronbichler
Copy link
Contributor

This looks like a great simplification, now that we can get the data uniform. I guess we need some backward compatibility setting for deal.II 9.3 (I assume we could choose something similar as I did in #120 with a copy to double vectors, in absence of the most recent changes slated for inclusion deal.II regarding the float vectors).

@peterrum peterrum changed the title [WIP] Refactor InterfaceCoupling Refactor InterfaceCoupling Jan 7, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@kronbichler kronbichler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me, apart from the questions where we still need to decide.

@nfehn
Copy link
Member

nfehn commented Jan 10, 2022

@peterrum Many thanks for these changes. This PR is a good example of what we describe in ExaDG's readme under "Philosophy" (https://github.com/exadg/exadg#philosophy).

@nfehn
Copy link
Member

nfehn commented Jan 10, 2022

These changes should be tested "manually" by running FSI examples which use this functionality.

@nfehn nfehn added deal.II update Changes due to updates in deal.II refactoring Code changes that do not impact functionality labels Jan 10, 2022
@peterrum
Copy link
Member Author

@nfehn Thanks for the review. I'll try to integrate the suggestions later today or tomorrow!

@peterrum
Copy link
Member Author

@nfehn I have applied the comments. I have run the cylinder_with_flag test case. I can run the other benchmarks tomorrow as well.

@nfehn
Copy link
Member

nfehn commented Jan 11, 2022

In principle, one example should be enough because the algorithm in terms of interface coupling is the same for all examples. However, since the cylinder example is a 2d example, it could make sense to run a 3d example as well, e.g. pressure_wave.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
deal.II update Changes due to updates in deal.II refactoring Code changes that do not impact functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants