Mailman 3 August 2009 - SfePy

Re: Making up to $1,000 Everyday On Complete Auto-Pilot!
by Ondrej Certik 01 Sep '09

01 Sep '09

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 4:12 PM, digna hamm<dignah...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Making up to $1,000 Everyday On Complete Auto-Pilot!the fastest system > for you to start earning money online I have ever seen. > http://www.easyinternetbiz.net/index.html Very interesting. Is this the new feature of sfepy? :) Ondrej

3 3

user-defined functions reimplemented
by Robert Cimrman 19 Aug '09

19 Aug '09

Hi, addressing the issues 36 and 93, see [1], I have created an experimental branch at [2]. The purpose of those changes is: - to unify passing extra arguments to boundary condition, material, and region functions - to unify/improve handling of material parameters in terms There is now a new input file keyword for registering the functions: functions = { <function_name> : (<function instance>,), ... } All functions have the same first two arguments: ts : the time-stepping information coor : the coordinates to evaluate the function in Then, depending on the function type (region selection, material parameters, boundary condition values, ...) there are additional keyword arguments. For examples, see tests/test_functions.py and the input files in input/ (find them with "git grep 'functions ='"). The most important change in the functions branch is the following: all the material parameters (e.g. the elastic constants passed to the linear elastic term, the permeability passed to the diffusion term, ...) are evaluated directly in the quadrature points of the physical domain - the evaluation function gets a bunch of quadrature points, and returns its values in those points - that's all sweet and simple. Thus all terms should accept material parameters given by a general function of time and space. Not all the terms are updated to this new approach, only those that are covered by the tests - all tests pass. The examples in the 'examples' directory work too. What to do next: - all terms should be used in some test - more tests are needed. - it would be great if you try the branch [2] and report any problems here or at [1]. cheers, r. [1] http://code.google.com/p/sfepy/issues/list [2] http://github.com/rc/sfepy/tree/functions

1 0

visualization updates
by Robert Cimrman 12 Aug '09

12 Aug '09

Hi, the latest git version of sfepy has two new features related to visualization of results: - postproc.py can now create animations, see 'postproc.py -h'. You need ffmpeg to try it out, otherwise just a series of figures is generated - there is a very simple GUI based on traits and mayavi (sfepy_gui.py) - Enthought Tool Suite is needed [1]. On gentoo, it is the dev-python/ets ebuild. r. [1] http://code.enthought.com/

2 2

Stepping in frequency rather than time
by Logan Sorenson 11 Aug '09

11 Aug '09

Hi, I have been familiarizing myself with sfepy for the last week or so. So far, I like what I see! :) My question is regarding the time stepping solver. I would like to step through the frequency domain instead of in time. My naive understanding is to convert time derivatives to i*omega by assuming the solution has the form exp(i*omega*t). I believe this is what is done in input/piezo.py, where the mass term is multiplied by omega_squared. So based off that assumption, I added the time stepping solver to input/piezo.py as shown in input/time_poisson.py. Then I tried a couple ways to get the omega_squared value to depend on ts.time. The current way I'm trying is to multiply the 'density' parameter by ts.time**2 (assuming ts.time actually represents the frequency) in the get_inclusion_pars function, and removed completely the omega_squared string substitution in the equation definition (please see the attached file). This seems to work ok, but I'm not sure this is the best way to include the frequency in the equation definition. I.e., it's not very explicit. Is there a better way to do this? Also, is using the time stepping solver in this manner okay, or is there something I'm ignoring like the result becoming incorrect because it depends on the previously "frequency"? Thanks very much! Best regards, Logan

2 4

[Fwd: git book]
by Robert Cimrman 10 Aug '09

10 Aug '09

FYI: Ondrej found a nice book about git. r. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: git book Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:57:16 -0600 Hi, I found another git book today: http://progit.org/book/ I think it's pretty good. As an example, stuff like rewriting history -- e.g. when you need to address reviewer comments to fix your patches, just follow the howto here: http://progit.org/book/ch6-4.html Ondrej

1 0