Re: [Libmesh-devel] Mesh union operation?

[David K. <dkn...@se...>]

On 08/29/2012 05:43 PM, John Peterson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:47 PM, David Knezevic
> <dkn...@se...> wrote:
>> I've attached a slightly updated version of the patch. It's working well for
>> me. I can go ahead and check it in if you think it's generally useful.
> Looks good to me.  Minor comments below...

Those changes are all good by me. I'll make them. Some comments:



> +  void stitch_meshes (SerialMesh& other_mesh,
> +                      boundary_id_type
> this_mesh_boundary=BoundaryInfo::invalid_id,
> +                      boundary_id_type
> other_mesh_boundary=BoundaryInfo::invalid_id,
> +                      Real tol=TOLERANCE,
> +                      bool clear_stitched_boundary_ids=false);
>
> So, by default, the function generates disjoint grids?

Yep.

> I guess I'd prefer the default to be that the user explicitly has to
> pass BoundaryInfo::invalid_id if he wants to skip the node matching
> procedure.
>
> The idea being that this function would primarily be used with the
> intent of producing a single, conforming grid with no overlapping
> nodes; while some smaller percentage of power users would use it to
> create overlapping domains and subsequently handle that in some
> application-dependent way.
>
> So we should make the function harder to accidentally call the wrong
> way in the majority of use cases...

OK, no problem.


>
> +    libMesh::out << "In SerialMesh::stitch_meshes:" << std::endl
> +                 << "This mesh has " << this_boundary_node_ids.size()
> << " nodes on specified boundary" << std::endl
> +                 << "Other mesh has " <<
> other_boundary_node_ids.size() << " nodes on specified boundary" <<
> std::endl
> +                 << "Found " << node_to_node_map.size() << " matching
> nodes." << std::endl << std::endl;
>
> Maybe only print in debug mode?  Or we could pass a verbosity flag...

I prefer a verbosity flag since I've already found this output very 
useful for "big" meshes to make sure that it's properly merged the 
overlapping nodes.

David