[petsc-users] DMPlex higher order elements

[Andrew Ho]

>
> Correspondence should not be hard since you can mark the mesh however you
> like.


True, I guess I need to do this anyways in order to apply boundary
conditions.

If you are happy with quadratic surface approximations, then you are in a
> great spot here. However, I think its easy to push to a place where they
> are insufficient (needing exact normals for conservation or balance,
> needing accurate volume conservation, ...) and you must interact with the
> CAD model. However, we have tried this before. Jed had a hard time with the
> CAD file reader, and when Jed has a hard time I usually give up immediately.


I suppose that's true. The more I look at what Cubit/other meshing software
generate at the surface, I don't think it can exactly represent even simple
conics sections such as circular arcs and ellipses exactly, which is a
shame. Still, I'd take 3rd order accuracy with quadratic surfaces over 2nd
order accuracy, and I'm assuming that whatever is needed to support Tri6
elements in DMPlex generalizes easily to Tri10/Tri15/etc. whenever there
exists a meshing tool capable of generating these meshes.

-- 
Andrew Ho
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20160824/9527650f/attachment.html>