On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 19:28 +0100, Chris Walker wrote:
> Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 11:02 +0100, Chris Walker wrote:
> > > And http://www.opennovation.org/ provides a much better categorisation
> > > of engineering type packages than I did.
> > >
> > > Categories there are:
> > >
> > > Partial Differential Equation (PDE) Solvers
> > > General Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
> > > Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
> > > Electromagnetism and Optics
> > > Software for Phase Field simulations
> > > Boundary Element Method (BEM)
> > >
> > > Pre- and post-processing frameworks and tools
> > >
> > >
> > > Computer-Aided Design (CAD)
> > >
> > > Multi-body dynamics
> > >
> > > Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME)
> > > (Ab initio and Molecular dynamics codes listed here)
> >
> > As the owner/maintainer of opennovation.org, I'm struggling with this
> > categorization, and welcome input. For example:
> > * Is libMesh FEA or CFD? It is a general FEA lib, but its
> > examples and development point toward CFD -- not to mention that
> > its authors are the CFD group at UT Austin. Saturne is clearly
> > CFD and Aster is clearly mechanics/heat (as are CacluliX and
> > Impact), so why should Aster, CalculiX and Impact be in general
> > FEA?
> I've got as far as bending a beam using FEA, so take this with some
> pinches of salt.
>
> Would listing all the programs in one PDE solvers in one category, but
> having "ticks" for CFD, mechanics, etc solve the problem - these would
> correspond naturally to tags.
>
> Eg:
>
> CFD | Mechancics | Integrated pre/post |
> x | x | | Prog1
> x | | x | Prog 2
Excellent idea. Makes for a big table though, once you start listing
all of the interesting capabilities. I have the beginnings of such a
beast (going through a transition) at:
http://www.opennovation.org/fea.html
(Posting this here will motivate me to work on finishing it. :-)
> > * Should libraries be treated differently from standalone codes?
> > Or is input file vs. short program which calls the library
> > functions merely a semantics issue? Aster calls its python
> > scripts "input files" where FiPy calls the exact same thing
> > "programs which call its functions".
> > * How about "standalone" FEA codes like Aster, vs. an integrated
> > pre- post- and solver like OpenFOAM?
>
> If you like the idea above, then have an Integrated pre/post solver
> "tick".
>
> You could then have a "separated pre/post processor". Knowing which
> pre/post processor works with which codes will also help.
Indeed!
> > These are some of the reasons I think keywords or tags are more
> > appropriate than "categories". But keywords/tags don't lend themselves
> > to well-organized websites...
>
> If there is an obvious set of tags, can you suggest them here.
Okay, here's a start:
* PDE-solver
* finite-elements
* boundary-elements
* finite-differences
* integrated-mesher
* integrated-visualization
* fluid-dynamics
* solid-mechanics
* heat-mass-transfer
* radiation
* electromagnetics
* multi-domain
* multi-thread
* MPI
* PVM
* works-with [Salomé | gmsh | VTK ...]
This list can grow arbitrarily if we let it.
-Adam
--
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Engineering consulting with open source tools
http://www.opennovation.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part