For instance, instead of a generic triangular mesh a more structured triangular mesh or even a quad mesh would produce better solutions. I’m fairly sure this is not the most efficient way (both programmatically and numerically) and I’m sure as well that there are better ways to solve this problem. This used to be easier (let’s say back in 2016). That are filtered out because their k_co^2 is 1 or smaller. This gives me a 3 modes for this 5 mm by 2.5 mm waveguide and a bunch of spurious modes. Print(np.sort(np.array(computed_eigenvalues)))
We’ll use the OpenCASCADE kernel (because, why not?): SetFactory("OpenCASCADE") Let’s start with the most static but straight-forward aproach: The geo-file straight from Gmsh’s UI. The goal is to build a rectangle of 5 mm × 2.5 mm with two physical groups (the boundary and the inner area). It should be noted that getting the Gmsh Python API is not hard but still a bit tricky depending on context. Which one to choose depends on your workflow. The three methods shown below are equivalent.
#FENICS AND GMSH CODE#
So, with no futher ado, here are code blocks that It’s a subtle change in Meshio, which makes it non-obvious. After a day of fiddeling, I realised that a lot of example code discussed in the thread broke with Meshio version 4.0.0 and newer. So, there’s an ongoing thread on the discussion group which is extensive, but frankly hard to follow. So, the Fenics community decided to embrace XDMF as mesh format of choice (good idea) but as usual with new stuff it’s WIP. However, the problem I experienced with both packages is their rapid development, consequently breaking changes and sometimes a lack of up-to-date documentation.
#FENICS AND GMSH SOFTWARE#
Meshio is a great piece of software if you’re into converting meshes, or for that matter, if you’re using Fenics for finite elements calculations.
Package versions this was tested with ():Ĭheck your versions with the code provided here.
0 kommentar(er)
