Open sungho91 opened 1 year ago
Hi @sungho91 the methods -lo 3
and -lo 4
are not implemented for NC meshes and won't work.
We haven't tested Remhos with NC meshes, but I expect some combinations to work. I'll try and let you know soon.
You can also try by simplifying the setup (disable the monotonicity), and then go back incrementally. For example -ho 3 -lo 0 -fct 0
and if that works, try enabling some -lo
option, and then finally try enabling the -fct
option.
@vladotomov
According to my quick couple of tests, introducing a low-order solver prohibits advection between coarse- and fine-mesh regions. -ho 2 or -ho 3
without -lo and -fct works but the solution from them seems to need improvement.
I'm on travel this week, but I'll take a look when I come back.
@sungho91 seems that the -ho 3
and -lo 5
(simplest LO solver) work with the code in master
, I tried these:
mpirun -np 4 remhos -m ./data/amr-quad.mesh -p 14 -rs 2 -dt 0.001 -tf 0.4 -ho 3 -lo 5 -fct 2
mpirun -np 4 remhos -m ./data/amr-quad.mesh -p 14 -rs 2 -dt 0.001 -tf 0.4 -ho 3 -lo 5 -fct 4
Hi all,
I'm incorporating Remhos into my code to remap the L2 fields after remeshing. I believe the remapping is functioning correctly with the conforming mesh, but I'm encountering some issues with a non-conforming mesh.
In the case of a conforming mesh, the mesh simply moves, and the field does not move because they are advected together. However, with a non-conforming mesh, the shape of the field is altered, leading to incorrect mapping (see attached image).
This is obvious when I use the example of Remhos. I typed
mpirun -np 8 remhos -m ./data/cube01_hex.mesh -p 10 -rs 1 -o 2 -dt 0.02 -tf 0.8 -ho 1 -lo 4 -fct 2
but I modified element attributes of 1st and 2nd element to two and Remhos like this way. You can see non-conforming mesh and final remapped field is highly distorted. I think advection is prohibited between coarse- and fine-mesh regions.Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
Sungho