-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix MOAB canonical ordering during element splitting #167
Conversation
Should we have a test for this somehow? |
I'm not sure how we'd test canonical ordering of tetrahedra/splitting of elements directly but one test that we should probably add is to ensure no elements with negative volume are present |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A quick question before we move forward....
source_mesh.create_mesh() | ||
|
||
assert len(source_mesh.volumes) == num_elements_exp | ||
assert len([i for i in source_mesh.volumes if i < 0]) == num_neg_vols_exp |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice - does this fail with the old/wrong canonical ordering?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With the old canonical ordering, this doesn't fail on the test equilibrium, but it does fail with WISTELL-D. On WISTELL-D using these parameters, the number of elements is as expected but 108 elements (1.47%) have negative volume.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @connoramoreno
Corrects implementation of MOAB canonical ordering. Changes are as follows:
Closes #166