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

dll error executing the win_64 version #9

Open
mdit999 opened this issue Jun 5, 2018 · 11 comments
Open

dll error executing the win_64 version #9

mdit999 opened this issue Jun 5, 2018 · 11 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mdit999
Copy link

mdit999 commented Jun 5, 2018

poub

@rmcdermo rmcdermo assigned rmcdermo and drjfloyd and unassigned rmcdermo Jun 5, 2018
@rmcdermo
Copy link
Contributor

rmcdermo commented Jun 5, 2018

@drjfloyd ,
I don't have a Windows machine handy. Can you have a look at this?

@drjfloyd
Copy link
Contributor

drjfloyd commented Jun 5, 2018

It looks like the release is just an executable rather than an install package which contains the DLL. Do you have FDS installed on your system? If you do, try copying the dll from the FDS install directory (it is part of the FDS installation package) to where the RADCAL executable is.

@drjfloyd
Copy link
Contributor

drjfloyd commented Jun 5, 2018

I guess we could also replace the win 64 exe on the release page with a zip file containing the exec and the dll

@rmcdermo
Copy link
Contributor

rmcdermo commented Jun 5, 2018

Can you try to create an independent directory (outside FDS PATH) for RADCAL and test. Then, yes, we can replace the current download with a .zip with necessary libraries.

@drjfloyd
Copy link
Contributor

drjfloyd commented Jun 5, 2018

dumpbin /imports shows four DLLs are linked. Three are windows system DLLs (advapi32, imagehlp, and kernel32) and the fourth is libiomp5md.

libiomp5md.dll only links to kernel32.dll.

@mas-co
Copy link

mas-co commented Dec 7, 2021

Problem still persists in 2021. Has there been any progress at all at fixing this?

@mas-co
Copy link

mas-co commented Dec 7, 2021

I did a little digging and found out that the libiomp5md.dll is part of the redistributable libraries for Intel's Fortran and c++ libraries.
I was able to download the libraries for the 2020 version of the Fortran compiler from: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/tool/redistributable-libraries-for-intel-c-and-fortran-2020-compilers-for-windows.html and this seems to be working.

Also, I was able to compile the source files with gfortran (GNU Fortran) v. 11.2.0 to run with windows (using mingw-w64). However, I have noticed some differences with the default case, and I noticed the following differences:

compiler: intel gfortran difference
a(planck) 9.47E-03 9.21E-03 2.75%
a(eff) 4.08E-03 3.77E-03 7.60%
e(eff) 1.21E-01 1.13E-01 6.61%
tau 8.79E-01 8.87E-01 -0.91%
Incd. Flux 1.0086E+03 1.0170E+03 -0.83%

Note: gfortran compiler (11.2.0) on Linux (Ubuntu 20.04) yielded identical results as the gfortran on windows compiler (or as close as I can tell).

trans_example_intel
trans_example_1_gfortran

NB: Intel Fortran traces are on top.

@drjfloyd
Copy link
Contributor

drjfloyd commented Dec 7, 2021

The radcal exe on github is from 2016 and there has been a slight change to how soot is dealt with since then. If I edit the default radcal.in file and zero out the soot, the radcal exe on github and the radcal compiled with the current source give the same result.
Github Exe Current Source
AMEAN (CM-1): 3.085878E-03 3.085878E-03
PLANCK MEAN ABSORPTION (CM-1): 8.909276E-03 8.909276E-03
TOTAL EMISSIVITY: 9.332991E-02 9.332991E-02
RECEIVED FLUX (W/M2/STR): 1.036263E+03 1.036263E+03
TOTAL TRANSMISSIVITY: 9.052858E-01 9.052858E-01

Your newly compiled version is OK.

@mas-co
Copy link

mas-co commented Dec 7, 2021

Thanks for looking at that. It is greatly appreciated!

Also, since the source of the .dll has been founds, should this issue be closed?

@mdit999
Copy link
Author

mdit999 commented Dec 7, 2021 via email

@hreising
Copy link

@mas-co Would you mind sharing how you were able to compile with gfortran (modified makefile)?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants