Closed jgiven100 closed 4 years ago
Merging #674 into develop will increase coverage by
0.08%
. The diff coverage is88.89%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #674 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 96.54% 96.62% +0.08%
===========================================
Files 122 122
Lines 25270 25295 +25
===========================================
+ Hits 24396 24440 +44
+ Misses 874 855 -19
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
tests/io/write_mesh_particles.cc | 87.67% <80.00%> (-0.42%) |
:arrow_down: |
include/solvers/mpm_base.tcc | 73.53% <92.31%> (+4.09%) |
:arrow_up: |
tests/mpm_explicit_usf_test.cc | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
tests/mpm_explicit_usl_test.cc | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
src/io/io.cc | 86.79% <0.00%> (+0.94%) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b14691d...86268c1. Read the comment docs.
@kks32 Yes, works with material_sets and all particles are correctly updated.
@ezrayst and I quickly changed the assign_particles
function to include an output that showed us the original and updated material_id
.
material_id
s were intially asigned unsigned_max
material_id
s updated to material_id
provided in particles:"generator"
pset_id
, some particles updated to new material_id
provided in material_sets
Unfortunately didn't grab any screenshots.
For doing the test we also need entity_sets.json
file
@kks32 for resume
function, don't we get the material from the current material_id
stored in .h5
file for each particle? This means we would not pass this function anymore right?
I tested a simple case using resume
and stress &displacement outputs matched non-resume outputs
@jgiven100 thanks for testing resume. For testing you can add it to tests/io/write_mesh_particles.cc
JSON object and write to a file.
@kks32 within tests/io/write_mesh_particles.cc
are you thinking:
"material_id": 0
within the initial particle generatormaterial_sets
to update to correct "material_id": 1
ALL TESTS PASS
remains for mpmtest
@jgiven100 I was thinking writing an entitiy_sets.json file, if we don't already do that and see if we can assign material ids to particle sets.
the current implementation of particle generator is creating pset_id: 0
so the procedure I've described is assigning material_id: 1
based on a particle set without having to include an entity_sets.json
"material_sets": [
{
"material_id": 1,
"pset_id": 0
}
],
Could you please fix clangfomat issue: https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/cb-geo/mpm/1009/workflows/d64c9659-c6c3-4bd2-b72b-60b008c8772f/jobs/5597
@kks32 & @ezrayst
The material_id
is now updated via material_sets
based particle set defined in entity_sets.json
instead of pset_id
created by particle generator
@bodhinandach are you happy, could you approve before I merge?
@kks32 oops I got excited and already merged. Sorry!
Describe the PR Adding the option to update
material_id
based onpset_id
for a single input file (i.e.particles.txt
).Related Issues/PRs https://github.com/cb-geo/mpm/issues/671
Additional context Input
JSON
must include new section "material_sets":And the "mesh:" section must include: