Implications for postprocessing of interior boundaries: For now we have removed the "Side" configuration file parameter and upgraded the surface dielectric loss postprocessing to automatically detect the right side for evaluating the fields based on the MA/MS/SA characteristic. All other interior boundaries use the average of the field on both sides which makes sense mostly. The case this doesn't work is visualization in ParaView of the boundary data collection, where for cracked internal boundary elements you have two elements directly on top of each other which need to be separated by some positive distance in order for ParaView to display the data on each "side" correctly. This is a WIP...
See https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965997814000660, or https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/blob/master/examples/api/crack3d.py in Gmsh. Enabled with the
"CrackInternalBoundaryElements"configuration file parameter (on by default, off to restore previous behavior).Implications for postprocessing of interior boundaries: For now we have removed the
"Side"configuration file parameter and upgraded the surface dielectric loss postprocessing to automatically detect the right side for evaluating the fields based on the MA/MS/SA characteristic. All other interior boundaries use the average of the field on both sides which makes sense mostly. The case this doesn't work is visualization in ParaView of the boundary data collection, where for cracked internal boundary elements you have two elements directly on top of each other which need to be separated by some positive distance in order for ParaView to display the data on each "side" correctly. This is a WIP...