Ok, I will think where to put it. The current sphinx docs can be accessed from sfepy.org, the sources are in doc subdir of the git checkout.
Cheers, r.
----- Reply message ----- From: "Andre Smit" freev...@gmail.com To: sfepy...@googlegroups.com Subject: easier_terms branch merged Date: Wed, Jul 27, 2011 16:58 Anytime past Aug 1 is good - swamped until then:) It would help if you could create the initial Sphinx docs as a start. I'll then transfer the Github primer which should be in a similar format and patch these to revise.
a.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
On 07/27/11 16:38, Andre Smit wrote:
Yes - let's do it. I suggest rewriting certain sections though to make it
more formal and clearer - and revisiting some of the figures. I'd also like
to include sections on modeling using abaqus and another on paraview
post-processing.
Those section would be pretty useful! I have to update also the developer guide to reflect the current state. (And fix finally term docstrings...)
I would like to make 2011.3 some time in the first half of August (before euroscipy), so it would be nice to have something by then. (Just a note, I am not trying to rush you ;))
Unfortunately my gmsh is down at the moment - it's a bugger to recompile :)
Fingers crossed :)
r.
a.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Robert Cimrmancimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
Great! Do you think we should include somehow the primer into the sphinx
docs? It's really a very nice document showing lots of features.
r.
On 07/27/11 15:37, Andre Smit wrote:
Sounds good - I'll update the Primer accordingly.
a
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Robert Cimrmancimr...@ntc.zcu.cz
wrote:
Yes, it is.
Now you need to explicitly write the term evaluation mode other than
'eval'
which is the default. So the fix is:
strain = ev('de_cauchy_strain.2.Omega(****u)', mode='el_avg')
stress = ev('de_cauchy_stress.2.Omega(****Asphalt.D, u)',
mode='el_avg')
You can also add verbose=False to suppress output, if you wish.
The term evaluation modes are:
'eval' : evaluate the integral over a region, result has dimension like
the
quantity integrated
'el_avg' : element average - result is array of the quantity is averaged
in
each element of a region - this is the mode for postprocessing
'qp' : quantity interpolated into quadrature points of each element in a
region
'weak' : assemble either the vector or matrix according to dw_mode
argument.
Look at ProblemDefinition.evaluate() doc to see description of all the
arguments.
Currently, not all terms support all the modes, one needs to look at the
sources =:) But all dw_* terms support 'weak' mode, all 'dq_*' term
support
'eval' mode, 'de_*' term support 'el_avg' mode etc. Actually most 'dq_*',
'de_*', 'di_*', 'd_' terms support 'eval', 'el_avg' and 'qp' modes.
The prefixes are due to history when the mode argument was not available,
so now they are mostly redundant, but at least one as a notion what is
the
evaluation purpose of each term. They may disappear after some more term
unification. easier_terms branch already resulted in a number of terms
disappearing.
So, that's how things are now :)
r.
Wow! Can't wait for 2011.3! :-)
Which repo - development?
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
Ok, I will think where to put it. The current sphinx docs can be accessed from sfepy.org, the sources are in doc subdir of the git checkout.
Cheers, r.
----- Reply message ----- From: "Andre Smit" freev...@gmail.com To: sfepy...@googlegroups.com Subject: easier_terms branch merged Date: Wed, Jul 27, 2011 16:58
Anytime past Aug 1 is good - swamped until then:) It would help if you could create the initial Sphinx docs as a start. I'll then transfer the Github primer which should be in a similar format and patch these to revise.
a.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.czwrote:
On 07/27/11 16:38, Andre Smit wrote:
Yes - let's do it. I suggest rewriting certain sections though to make it more formal and clearer - and revisiting some of the figures. I'd also like to include sections on modeling using abaqus and another on paraview post-processing.
Those section would be pretty useful! I have to update also the developer guide to reflect the current state. (And fix finally term docstrings...)
I would like to make 2011.3 some time in the first half of August (before euroscipy), so it would be nice to have something by then. (Just a note, I am not trying to rush you ;))
Unfortunately my gmsh is down at the moment - it's a bugger to recompile
:)
Fingers crossed :)
r.
a.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Robert Cimrmancimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
Great! Do you think we should include somehow the primer into the sphinx
docs? It's really a very nice document showing lots of features.
r.
On 07/27/11 15:37, Andre Smit wrote:
Sounds good - I'll update the Primer accordingly.
a
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Robert Cimrmancimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
Yes, it is.
Now you need to explicitly write the term evaluation mode other than 'eval' which is the default. So the fix is:
strain = ev('de_cauchy_strain.2.Omega(******u)', mode='el_avg') stress = ev('de_cauchy_stress.2.Omega(******Asphalt.D, u)', mode='el_avg')
You can also add verbose=False to suppress output, if you wish.
The term evaluation modes are:
'eval' : evaluate the integral over a region, result has dimension like the quantity integrated
'el_avg' : element average - result is array of the quantity is averaged in each element of a region - this is the mode for postprocessing
'qp' : quantity interpolated into quadrature points of each element in a region
'weak' : assemble either the vector or matrix according to dw_mode argument.
Look at ProblemDefinition.evaluate() doc to see description of all the arguments.
Currently, not all terms support all the modes, one needs to look at the sources =:) But all dw_* terms support 'weak' mode, all 'dq_*' term support 'eval' mode, 'de_*' term support 'el_avg' mode etc. Actually most 'dq_*', 'de_*', 'di_*', 'd_' terms support 'eval', 'el_avg' and 'qp' modes.
The prefixes are due to history when the mode argument was not available, so now they are mostly redundant, but at least one as a notion what is the evaluation purpose of each term. They may disappear after some more term unification. easier_terms branch already resulted in a number of terms disappearing.
So, that's how things are now :)
r.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sfepy-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sfepy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sfepy-devel+unsubscribe@** googlegroups.com sfepy-devel%...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** group/sfepy-devel?hl=enhttp://groups.google.com/group/sfepy-devel?hl=en .
-- Andre
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sfepy-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sfepy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sfepy-devel...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sfepy-devel?hl=en.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sfepy-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sfepy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sfepy-devel...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sfepy-devel?hl=en.
participants (3)
-
Andre Smit -
Md. Golam Rashed -
Robert Cimrman