Re: [Libmesh-users] Should I move to FEMSystem?

[Paul T. B. <ptb...@gm...>]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Renato Poli <re...@gm...> wrote:

> Hi
>
> So far I am using the "introduction" style to solve a linear system of
> equations.
> I attach a assemble function, increment timestep and march.
>
> Things are getting more complex, though.
> I'm starting to look into adaptative meshing and non linearity, and
> the code is getting sort of dirty.
> I can reorganize things, that would help, but I consider rewrite using
> FEMSystem.
> Does not seem simple, but looks powerful.
>
> Questions:
> - Is FEMSystem the best way to move forward?
>

It's certainly one option. It could simplify some aspects, particularly
unsteady vs. steady solves, etc. You'd still need to worry about
adaptivity, but most other things will be contained to element level
quantities with FEMSystem.


> - Is there any other possibility I should be aware of?
>

There is a project called GRINS (https://github.com/grinsfem/grins) that
Roy and I develop (mostly myself and my students these days) that is built
around FEMSystem for facilitating multiphysics FEM analysis. It could be
useful and has a few nice carrots. A much larger project that heavily
leverages libMesh is called MOOSE (https://github.com/idaholab/moose); it
could also be useful for multiphysics applications. MOOSE doesn't leverage
FEMSystem per se, but is an excellent package with a lot of support.

If you have questions about GRINS, please feel free to contact me off list.

Hope that helps.


>
> Thanks,
> Renato
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Libmesh-users mailing list
> Lib...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
>