Re: [Gmsh] Questions on 4.1 format
Thanks Max and Christophe for the answers; "Don't hesitate to contribute your feedback on https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/795 : we will use it to track suggestions or corrections." -> I'll do Le lun. 30 mars 2020 à 16:51, paul francedixhuit a écrit : > Hi All > I'm currently having a look to the new 4.1 gmsh format. > > Compared to the previous 2.2 legacy one: > >- I guess *$Nodes* and *$Elements* for example use now blocs (or it >has been splitted in blocs) in order to take advantages of parallelization, >hasn't it? >- *$Entities* and *$PhysicalNames* are used to define specific groups >of elements to apply on specific features (typically sub-parts) > > Nonetheless concerning *$NodeData* (and *$ElementNodeData*), I've not > tested it so far but I feel the structure remains identical to the 2.2 one: > am I right? if so I can imagine improvements will be provided in a next > future, won't be? > > The next steps will be to use it through the Python API > > Bye > > Paul > ___ gmsh mailing list gmsh@onelab.info http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
Re: [Gmsh] Questions on 4.1 format
Hi Paul, There's a discussion on the new format here that might be helpful: https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/444 On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:02 AM paul francedixhuit wrote: > Hi All > I'm currently having a look to the new 4.1 gmsh format. > > Compared to the previous 2.2 legacy one: > >- I guess *$Nodes* and *$Elements* for example use now blocs (or it >has been splitted in blocs) in order to take advantages of parallelization, >hasn't it? >- *$Entities* and *$PhysicalNames* are used to define specific groups >of elements to apply on specific features (typically sub-parts) > > Nonetheless concerning *$NodeData* (and *$ElementNodeData*), I've not > tested it so far but I feel the structure remains identical to the 2.2 one: > am I right? if so I can imagine improvements will be provided in a next > future, won't be? > > The next steps will be to use it through the Python API > > Bye > > Paul > ___ > gmsh mailing list > gmsh@onelab.info > http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh > -- Max Orok Contractor www.mevex.com ___ gmsh mailing list gmsh@onelab.info http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
Re: [Gmsh] Questions on 4.1 format
> On 30 Mar 2020, at 16:51, paul francedixhuit wrote:
>
> Hi All
> I'm currently having a look to the new 4.1 gmsh format.
>
> Compared to the previous 2.2 legacy one:
> • I guess $Nodes and $Elements for example use now blocs (or it has
> been splitted in blocs) in order to take advantages of parallelization,
> hasn't it?
It allows that, yes. It also allows for much more efficient reading
from/writing to disk.
But more fundamentally, the new format reflects the underlying Gmsh data model
(http://gmsh.info/doc/texinfo/gmsh.html#Gmsh-API), and it contains all the
information needed by Gmsh to save/reload a model without information loss.
> • $Entities and $PhysicalNames are used to define specific groups of
> elements to apply on specific features (typically sub-parts)
Entities contain the underlying (topological) boundary representation of the
Gmsh model. Physical groups are just groups of entities. They are defined even
without a mesh. Mesh nodes/elements are stored in the model entities.
Note that the only two fields that are necessary in a simple MSH file are
$Nodes and $Elements. All the rest is useful for Gmsh - but can be omitted by
other codes if they don't need the additional topological model information.
> Nonetheless concerning $NodeData (and $ElementNodeData), I've not tested it
> so far but I feel the structure remains identical to the 2.2 one: am I right?
> if so I can imagine improvements will be provided in a next future, won't be?
>
Yes indeed. See the end of the
http://gmsh.info/doc/texinfo/gmsh.html#MSH-file-format section.
> The next steps will be to use it through the Python API
The Python tutorial is now on par with the GEO and C++ ones:
https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/tree/master/tutorial
New extended ("x") tutorials will be added in the near future to help new users
with features that are only available through the API (and not in GEO files).
Don't hesitate to contribute your feedback on
https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/795 : we will use it to track
suggestions or corrections.
Cheers,
Christophe
>
> Bye
>
> Paul
> ___
> gmsh mailing list
> gmsh@onelab.info
> http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
—
Prof. Christophe Geuzaine
University of Liege, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~geuzaine
___
gmsh mailing list
gmsh@onelab.info
http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
[Gmsh] Questions on 4.1 format
Hi All I'm currently having a look to the new 4.1 gmsh format. Compared to the previous 2.2 legacy one: - I guess *$Nodes* and *$Elements* for example use now blocs (or it has been splitted in blocs) in order to take advantages of parallelization, hasn't it? - *$Entities* and *$PhysicalNames* are used to define specific groups of elements to apply on specific features (typically sub-parts) Nonetheless concerning *$NodeData* (and *$ElementNodeData*), I've not tested it so far but I feel the structure remains identical to the 2.2 one: am I right? if so I can imagine improvements will be provided in a next future, won't be? The next steps will be to use it through the Python API Bye Paul ___ gmsh mailing list gmsh@onelab.info http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
