Structural Mechanics Cases #7
Conversation
| this.addInput("material_import_settings", "map"); // 1 | ||
| this.addOutput("solver_settings", "map"); | ||
| this.properties = { | ||
| "solver_type" : "Static", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "solver_type" : "Static", | |
| "solver_type" : "static", |
new syntax
| "residual_relative_tolerance" : 0.0001, | ||
| "residual_absolute_tolerance" : 1e-9, | ||
| "max_iteration" : 10, | ||
| "rotation_dofs" : false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be variable, can you expose it like the domain size?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think ricc wanted those to be modified directly from the properties
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the other GUIs this is automatically switched on depending on the user-defined elements. In this case, automating it would imply parsing the mpda (which we already do) and go through all the element types in the elements section. Not sure if this will be possible.
What is not clear to me is how we can select this field from the properties (e.g. the properties of a shell element are almost identical to that of a 2D plane stress case without rotations).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is similar as the CL problem that appeared above. As @rubenzorrilla says we need to extract more info from the mpda, which is not a problem but also need to dynamically generate nodes based on inputs, which is something we are missing at the moment (but possible).
I would leave it as is for this PR and make a separate one to implement those changes.
WeiqSun97
force-pushed
the
StructuralMechanicsWorkFlow
branch
from
7cff740
to
50654a7
Compare
| <script type="text/javascript" src="js/nodes/output_processes/gid_output_structural.js"></script> | ||
| <script type="text/javascript" src="js/nodes/output_processes/vtk_output_structural.js"></script> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we need specific nodes for the structural output?
…o StructuralMechanicsWorkFlow
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a couple of comments in the usage of
- AssignScalarVariableToConditionsProcess
- AssignVectorVariableProcess
Comments apply to both, but are basically the same. Any of the solutions would work, but I prefer if you could define them through the process_parser.js and update the examples accordingly.
Once this is addressed, I se no other reason to hold it back 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 If no one else have anything to add I think we can merge! Well done @WeiqSun97
| @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | |||
| class MaterialWriter { | |||
| constructor() | |||
| { | |||
| this.material_file_name = this.addWidget("string","Materials Filenae", "Materials"); | |||
| this.material_file_name = this.addWidget("string","Materials Filenae", "Materials.json"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| this.material_file_name = this.addWidget("string","Materials Filenae", "Materials.json"); | |
| this.material_file_name = this.addWidget("string","Materials Filename", "Materials.json"); |
Typo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you are commenting on an outdated file, as the specific file material_writer.js has been modified in this PR.
|
@Rbravo555 can we merge this? I would like to merge some changes on my side and I am afraid they can create conflicts. |
If you really need to merge your changes now, go ahead. But, how about we discuss this in a short meeting tomorrow morning? Afterwards, we can decide. |
|
No no, no hurry, but since this have been untouched for a long time I tought it was finished. Let's discuss it tomorrow 👍 |
This PR add necessary boxes to create structural mechanics cases