<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><P>Hi Aleks and Stephan,</P>
<P> </P>
<P>I have a question directly related to this. I would like to use the hpts() routine for my conjugate case, however like Markus mentioned, there is no support for a conjugate case at the moment. Were ya'll able to fix this?</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Thanks,</P>
<P>Michael</P>
<P> </P>
<P><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>To: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:38:05 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<BR>Subject: Re: [Nek5000-users] New Recycling BC based on interpolation<BR><BR>Hi Aleks,<BR><BR>what was your plan to fix it?<BR><BR>In fact I think findpts_eval() should work as is but there is no-err handling if you try to interpolate on a point in the solid using an input field based on the v-mesh.<BR><BR>Ok we don't need an err-handling at the moment. You'll get a ZERO value back although it is an invalid point for an input field based on the v-mesh.<BR><BR>Why is that?<BR>At the moment, all field arrays have the same layout and size (lx1,ly1,lz1,lelt) independent of the mesh type (v or T). We simply set all values of a v-variable to ZERO for iel>nelv and we don't touch these segments later on.<BR><BR>Stefan<BR><BR> <BR><BR><BR>On Jul 19, 2010, at 3:25 PM, nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov wrote:<BR><BR>> Hi Stefan,<BR>> <BR>> Yes, we have noticed you changed the interface -- and the latest version of Recycling Bcs w/ interpolation works for the latest repo version (548). <BR>> <BR>> Eventually we can get it working for CHT too.<BR>> <BR>> Best,<BR>> Aleks<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> From: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> To: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 7:05:21 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<BR>> Subject: Re: [Nek5000-users] New Recycling BC based on interpolation<BR>> <BR>> Hi Guys,<BR>> <BR>> I worked on the interpolation wrappers over the last months and I am not sure if the new recycling BC is compatible to the latest repo-version?<BR>> <BR>> Paul/Aleks: can you comment on that? <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Now, in the case of CHT (nelgt>nelgv) findpts_eval() won't work! I guess the size of the input field has to match the dimensions of XM1,YM1,ZM1 specified in inpts_setup(). <BR>> <BR>> I will talk to James if we can come up with an easy fix for that.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Stefan <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From: nek5000-users-bounces@lists.mcs.anl.gov on behalf of nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> Sent: Sun 7/18/2010 13:53<BR>> To: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> Subject: Re: [Nek5000-users] New Recycling BC based on interpolation<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Hi Markus,<BR>> <BR>> this stuff is all brand new and you are in the leading edge<BR>> of the testing (since none of us are exercising it in our<BR>> own applications), so there will be a bit of development as<BR>> we go forward. We can readily fix interp_v (but I advise<BR>> using it now in order to identify other issues).<BR>> <BR>> interpv is _much_ more expensive than gs_op.<BR>> <BR>> However, if one takes 1 part in a million and the other 1<BR>> part in 10,000 of the run time, then both are negligible.<BR>> So the question is really relative to the wall-clock time.<BR>> <BR>> Paul<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010, nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov wrote:<BR>> <BR>>> Hi,<BR>>> <BR>>> no, I haven't done any speed comparison. So I take it there is no principal <BR>>> difference between intpts and gs_op in terms of computational cost?<BR>>> <BR>>> I was referring to line 172f of the new recycling BC code:<BR>>> "<BR>>> if (nelgt.ne.nelgv) call exitti<BR>>> $ ('ABORT: interp_v() nelgt.ne.nelgv not yet supported!$',nelgv)<BR>>> "<BR>>> and was wondering if that is due to something in intpts and if so, if the <BR>>> same constraint would apply to findpts.<BR>>> <BR>>> Markus<BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>>> nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov wrote:<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Hi Markus,<BR>>>> <BR>>>> I don't know why this wouldn't work for nelgt > nelgv.<BR>>>> <BR>>>> I would say we don't know the performance hit yet - I think<BR>>>> someone is looking into this question. Performance will of course vary <BR>>>> significantly from problem to problem and platform<BR>>>> to platform. I suspect that it should not be a major hit ---<BR>>>> have you observed otherwise?<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Paul<BR>>>> <BR>>>> <BR>>>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010, nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov wrote:<BR>>>> <BR>>>>> Hi Aleks,<BR>>>>> <BR>>>>> thanks for the code, I looked over it and have two questions:<BR>>>>> -at some point, it is mentioned that this method does not work if <BR>>>>> nelgt>nelgv. Why is that? I am asking because this will be applied to a <BR>>>>> conjugate HT problem (although the recycling part is purely concerning <BR>>>>> flow+convection). Will this problem also occur when only findpts is used <BR>>>>> instead of intpts?<BR>>>>> -is there a performance difference between calling intpts as opposed to <BR>>>>> gs_op (as is done in the turbJet example) every time step for large scale <BR>>>>> production runs? The latter is what I used in my version.<BR>>>>> <BR>>>>> Thanks,<BR>>>>> Markus<BR>>>>> <BR>>>>> <BR>>>>> nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov wrote:<BR>>>>>> Hi Michael and Markus,<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> Here is a test case for an unsteady pipe flow with Michael's <BR>>>>>> GambitPipe.rea file which sets inlet Recycling BCs based on interpolation <BR>>>>>> from a cross-section downstream that you specify by a multiple of the <BR>>>>>> inlet normal:<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~obabko/z4.tgz<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> Let me know if you have any questions.<BR>>>>>> Best,<BR>>>>>> Aleks<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>>>>>> From: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>>>>> To: nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 5:06:48 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<BR>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Nek5000-users] New Recycling BC method?<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> No worries, just checkin in to see how it was going, thanks for the <BR>>>>>> update! Look forward to trying it out!<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>>> - Michael _______________________________________________<BR>>>>>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>>>>>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>>>>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>>>>>> <BR>>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>>>>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>>>>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>>>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>>>>> <BR>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>>>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>>>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>>>> <BR>>> _______________________________________________<BR>>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>> Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Nek5000-users mailing list<BR>Nek5000-users@lists.mcs.anl.gov<BR>https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users<BR></P></div></body></html>