-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
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
ASTE with time dependent functions #176
Comments
I discussed this topic with @davidscn to some degree because this overlaps with the With the The main drawback of
If I could do the same with ASTE (assuming installation is as simple as running a plain python script), I would be glad to replace the |
I think there is no need to replace the one with the other. We should simply be aware that both exist and how they differ. And carefully think before investing more time in the one or the other. |
ASTE is a great tool to analyze the error of a single map operation.
To simulate multiple time windows, we need to generate a complete mesh for every time step. This is not only very space inefficient, but also results in a lot of unnecessary IO.
It would be a great simple tool for testing transient mappings for functions that depend on t, as well as testing mappings with a time independent function to study their runtime stability over time.
Currently we have the following data flow:
We could pass the function directly to ASTE (preciceMap) and evaluate it on the input mesh using VTK.
Adding the time
t
as further input allows us to evaluate this for each time step/window without the need to read a completely new mesh.Time window size and max time windows are configurable in the configuration file.
Taking this one step further, using the function as input for both participants allows us to calculate the error directly in ASTE.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: