Perpendicular flap (IGA solid participant G+Smo)

[Crazy-Rich-Meghan]

Perpendicular Flap with G+Smo (IsoGeometric Analysis) and OpenFOAM

NOTE: Stress instead of Force.

This PR is still a draft, because the G+Smo adapter's documentation is still ongoing.

I have added a README.md file to guide users on running the tutorial with G+Smo. It includes detailed instructions for setup and execution.

[uekerman]

Thanks for these great contributions!
I did not yet try it out, but wanted to give some initial tips already.

Guidelines worth checking out:

• tutorials contribution guidelines
• style guide of the preCICE docs.

[uekerman]

Suggested change

	cd solid-gismo-elasticity
	cd solid-gismo

[Crazy-Rich-Meghan]

Hi @uekerman,

We have another variant of this benchmark uses Kirichhoff-Love shell elememt and will be called solid-gismo-shell. While the KL shell variant has been verified for both accuracy and convergence, the implementation is currently hard-coded and needs to be generalized to support other examples.

[uekerman]

Could we eventually keep both in the same folder and pick them within the run.sh script?

[uekerman]

I renamed the folder. We can easily call different version from the same run script. Should we?

[uekerman]

I am trying to install and run the case.

I am doing:

git clone gismo ... & cd gismo
mkdir build & cd build
cmake .. -DGISMO_OPTIONAL="gsKLShell;gsPreCICE;gsElasticity;gsStructuralAnalysis"
make solid-gismo-elasticity

and get

make: *** No rule to make target 'solid-gismo-elasticity'.  Stop.

And normal make works and gives me libgismo.so as expected.

I am a bit puzzled. How do I build the solid-gismo.cpp here? How does the adapter know about the available tutorials? Do I need to clone gismo into the tutorial case?

I guess what we need to do is to install the lib / make is discoverable and then add a CMakeLists.txt to the tutorial, which builds the actual solver?

[Crazy-Rich-Meghan]

I am trying to install and run the case.

I am doing:

git clone gismo ... & cd gismo
mkdir build & cd build
cmake .. -DGISMO_OPTIONAL="gsKLShell;gsPreCICE;gsElasticity;gsStructuralAnalysis"
make solid-gismo-elasticity

and get

make: *** No rule to make target 'solid-gismo-elasticity'.  Stop.

And normal make works and gives me libgismo.so as expected.

I am a bit puzzled. How do I build the solid-gismo.cpp here? How does the adapter know about the available tutorials? Do I need to clone gismo into the tutorial case?

I guess what we need to do is to install the lib / make is discoverable and then add a CMakeLists.txt to the tutorial, which builds the actual solver?

Hi Benjamin,

Thanks for testing this! The thing is, if you try to compile the file from the G+Smo side, we are using a different name for the filename since G+Smo and preCICE have different naming rules. On the G+Smo side, the solid participant filename is perpendicular-flap-vertex-gismo.cpp I have also changed the filename to perpendicular-flap-vertex-gismo under this PR.

Since we have multiple CPP files on our side, we cannot use a simple name like solid-gismo-elasticity.cpp. We have discussed this internally and decided that in the next version, we will consolidate everything into a single CPP file. Additionally, we will specify the meshes, boundary conditions, participant names, and other configurations using an XML file.

[uekerman]

With a few minor changes, I was able to run the case. Most importantly, I changed the data mapping constraint for the stresses to "consistent".

I now get:

The missing difference is probably due to the elements or refinement?

Thanks for testing this! The thing is, if you try to compile the file from the G+Smo side, we are using a different name for the filename since G+Smo and preCICE have different naming rules. On the G+Smo side, the solid participant filename is perpendicular-flap-vertex-gismo.cpp I have also changed the filename to perpendicular-flap-vertex-gismo under this PR.

The file perpendicular-flap-vertex-gismo.cpp here is not really needed, right? I now simply copied the executable over. And the name is fine. There is no standard for names of executables. The run.sh only needs to know the name.

I will continue cleaning up the case the next days. Please don't force push.

[uekerman]

We could explain here how different variants could be run.

[uekerman]

TODO

[uekerman]

Let's add a picture once we are happy with the results.

[uekerman]

This looks still a bit arbitrary to me. Currently, the output folder is empty. Shouldn't the csv go there?