Closed Sidaty1 closed 2 years ago
Hi @Sidaty1 and @jnbrunet, I changed back the definition of the element to its original one. It will allow merging without breaking the existing Caribou implementation of Hexahedron. Actually, if you change the definition of the Hexahedron you can have a good visualization of the FEniCS hexahedron.
We have 2 choices:
CaribouTopology
and CaribouForceField
(a lot of copy/paste just for visualization).I can take care of the first option easily but I do not feel confident about the second one... Please let me both know what you prefer, have a nice evening.
I would go for the first option. I think we should first merge the master branch in the fenics one as I just merged the element order refactoring PR](https://github.com/jnbrunet/caribou/pull/108). I can give it a try this evening.
Unfortunately, while not too difficult, we indeed have to specialize CaribouTopology
and CaribouForceField
for every new element type. I have some plan to remove the need of CaribouForceField specializations at some point and replace it by virtual calls.
Hi @jnbrunet, Ok, I can take care of option one. For the merge we will need to talk first because we are not working with the main branch of Caribou and SOFA, we had to freeze a version first :)
Alright, note that the main branch of caribou is compatible with SOFA v20.06, v20.12, v21.06, v21.12 and master.
When we test the forcefield using the Sofa GUI, we observe a wrong draw of hexahedron elements, this could be related to the topology change between Fenics and Caribou elements