tag:forum.featool.com,2006:forum-343Nabble - Suggestions and Feature Requests2024-03-28T02:21:02ZPost suggestions and feature requests here, and if possible include a reason why you think a specific feature would be a good idea to add to the toolboxes.tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-1555Polymer flow simulation2023-10-23T02:13:23Z2023-10-23T02:13:23Zmhmhussein
Hello please suggest a solver tool for Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) research problems for polymer production and elastic Turbulence of viscoelastic fluid polymer models (i.e., Giesekus; Rolie-Poly and FENE-P models).
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-1521Being able to remove equations from a model2023-08-17T12:24:44Z2023-08-17T12:24:44Zmsandink
Hello,
<br/><br/>If I'm not mistaken, there is currently no way to remove equations from the equation settings. This has caused considerable confusion, as deactivating equations causes eigenvalues to repeat themselves for a mode analysis I'm trying to do. In that sense this is both a suggestion and bug report. I hope this can be resolved.
<br/>
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-1427Transient Euler Bernoulli Problems2023-03-31T08:20:38Z2023-03-31T08:20:38ZH.U.Akay
I am surprised that we can not run transient Euler-Bernoulli problems with FEATool. There is no time integration solver for the second-order time derivatives (hyperbolic) in the code.
<br/><br/>I tried to use the Custom Equation mode by introducing a new variable forming two parabolic time-dependent equations, as it is done in the tutorials for the wave equation, but the Custom Equation mode does not support Hermite interpolation functions in this case. I am disappointed that the developers of FEATool do not support the solution of hyperbolic time-dependent problems by using the well-known Newmark's scheme.
<br/><br/>The situation is the same with the transient elasticity equations too. You can calculate eigenvalues, but no correct structural dynamics response can be calculated under dynamic loads.
<br/><br/>Hope this deficiency will be somehow removed.
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-1332How to get intermediate variables in function solvetime2022-10-19T16:47:15Z2022-10-19T16:47:15Zlusongno1
I call ex_navierstokes6 function to solve time-dependent flow around a cylinder and it works fine.
<br/>However, I want to take out the assembled matrix (such as stiffness matrix, mass matrix, etc.) during the time step, but it is embedded in the FEA kernel. I can only see this line of code which call the embedding functions:
<br/>````
<br/>if ~(nargin||nargout),help mfilename,return,end,varargout=cell(1,nargout);[varargout{:}]=featool('feval','solvetime',varargin{:});if ~ nargout,clear varargout,end
<br/>````
<br/>Is there any way I can get these intermediate data? It is important for my research.
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-1304Export plots as .pdf file2022-08-09T09:09:10Z2022-08-09T09:09:10ZVengatesan
Dear all,
<br/><br/>The tool is excel in solving and much simpler approach.
<br/><br/>I would like to export the plot as .pdf format in the post processing. Please let me know if anybody having suggestions to do it..
<br/><br/>Thanks in advance
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-909Import FEA struct from MATLAB2020-11-09T11:27:05Z2020-11-09T11:27:05Zrandress
Perhaps there is good reason not to.... but could there be a "File" menu option to import the same struct that is exported via the menu "Export FEA struct to MATLAB" option.
<br/><br/>This would seem to accomplish the same thing as the two step process:
<br/><pre>
>> save path_to_my_model.fea fea -v7
</pre>...followed by FEATool Gui "File" menu "Load Model/GUI Script" path_to_my_model.fea
<br/><br/>Perhaps a GUI option would make it too easy to mistakenly "pollute" FEATool with an illegal problem structure. And since there is already a two step method (above) to do this, which by is very nature carries with it a certain amount of caution, it may not be worth additional risk.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
<br/>
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-886Multi-boundary selection2020-10-27T19:51:26Z2020-10-27T19:51:26Zrandress
It would be convenient to be able to select multiple (especially internal) boundaries which require the same condition and coefficient.
<br/><br/>For example, a model with 104 boundaries is enclosed in a Block.
<br/><br/><img src="http://forum.featool.com/file/n886/multiple_boundary_selection.png" border="0"/><br/><br/>In this case, boundaries 7 through 110 need to be set the same: "Continuity". Each one must be selected and checked, then changed if necessary. But, for example, being able to left-click on number 7, select "Continuity" from the drop-down, scroll down and SHIFT+left-click on 110, then "Apply" would be very nice.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-829Selection of Objects and/or faces2020-10-04T23:30:39Z2020-10-04T23:30:39Zrandress
The "Geometry Objects" list is essential in being able to locate and select the desired objects (and now faces). However, I also liked being able to select using mouse-over-and-left-click that appeared with v1.13 beta2.1 (and disappeared with beta3 :-) A selected object remains selected as others are selected. Clicking on an already-selected item de-selects that item. Being able to select Objects and faces in this manner is quite convenient when possible (when the items are not hidden by objects that display "over" or "on top of" them).
<br/><br/>The only thing I was going to comment on (in beta2.1) was that when these selections were made using the mouse, the corresponding item in the "Geometry Objects" list was not selected. This was confusing.
<br/><br/>One problem I anticipate is how to distinguish between selection of object vs. face. Perhaps let "click" designate face and Crtl+Click designate object. Then it might work as follows:
<br/><pre>
- A click on an un-selected face selects the face (adds to set of selected items)
- A click on a selected face de-selects the face (but leaves undisturbed any existing object selection)
- A ctrl+click on an un-selected object selects the object (adds to set of selected items)
- A ctrl+click on a selected object de-selects the object (but leaves undisturbed any selected faces)
</pre><br/>But (unless that same method were extended to the method of selection within the "Geometry Objects" list, then the use of "Ctrl" to distinguish between face and object might be confused with the use of ctrl when making multiple selections (adding to items already selected)...but I think it might be workable because in the "Geometry Objects" list it is clear that you are selecting either the Object or one of its faces, so using the Ctrl+click to add (or subtract if clicking on an already selected item) in the usual way would make sense.
<br/><br/>An additional benefit would be that the [Ctrl+]click could be used to idenfity the object or face tag of an area of the model where it is hard to distinguish objects and/or faces.
<br/><br/>Just an idea.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
<br/><br/><br/><br/><br/>
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-820Geometry "Delete" tool reversal: UnDelete2020-10-01T20:31:33Z2020-10-01T20:31:33Zrandress
The Geometry mode's "Revert/Undo" tool reverses <b>any operation</b> on an object that has been previously modified or transformed (The creation of an object can't be "undone" - but it may simply be deleted :-).... <b>any operation</b>, that is, except "Delete".
<br/><br/>An Undo-delete tool would be convenient. If the creation and modification/transformation operations and parameters of a deleted object have not been recorded, re-creating it could be frustrating, if doable at all. It is true that if one of the "File-->Save As ..." operations happened to have been used before the deletion, the deleted object's pedigree and specifications may have been preserved. Still, it would be convenient and stressless to just undo an accidental or hasty mis-step.
<br/><br/>If that is a not easily done in the near term, then possibly a "do you really mean to delete this object" dialog might be a good alternative. Since some users (or any user from time to time) might consider this reminder to be an aggravation, it should include a "don't show me this again" check box or sub-option.
<br/><br/>If the Undo-delete tool <b>were</b> added, several functional alternatives come to mind:
<br/><br/>1) an "Undo-last-operation" (only good as an un-delete <b>if</b> "Delete" were the last operation done). To clarify, I am not suggesting that this function would be able to reverse-build a model from finish to start, but that it would always and only be capable of a single operation: to undo the very last operation on a geometry object. The undoing of operations previous to the immediately preceding one would not be possible.
<br/><br/>2) an "Un-delete" that restored the last deleted object (regardless of what object it was or when it had been deleted),
<br/><br/>3) an "Un-delete-designated-object" that restored a deleted object designated by its tag (e.g., "E3"). Since a user my not remember the tag of the deleted object, this function should probably prompt the user with a list of tags of deleted objects (from last deleted to first deleted).
<br/><br/>Note: The parent objects that are removed when transformed, such as "B1" and "C1" in the transformation"B1+C1==>TF1", are not intended to be considered "deleted" objects in the above function descriptions.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
<br/><br/>PS A third alternative to "UnDelete"or a "Delete Warning Dialog" might be a frequent save to a temp geometry or .fea file which could be viewed at any time and reverted to if desired. The frequency and location (and name perhaps) could be configurable.
<br/><br/><br/>
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-808Default ellipsoid axis vector2020-09-26T10:39:39Z2020-09-26T10:39:39Zrandress
The dialog for the creation of the geometry object ellipsoid includes an "axis" field that requires an [x y z] vector which is defaulted to [1 0 0].
<br/><br/><img src="http://forum.featool.com/file/n808/default_ellipsoid_dialog.png" border="0"/><br/><br/>The default settings produce the following:
<br/><br/><img src="http://forum.featool.com/file/n808/default_ellipsoid_axis_1_0_0.png" border="0"/><br/><br/>The "axis" vector determines the orientation of the ellipsoid. For these default settings, this vector [1 0 0] is the axis of the largest radii (z, in this case). However, it seems to me that the more intuitive default setting for this "axis" would be [0 0 1] so that the x, y, and z radii settings would be seen/measured along the x-, y-, and z-axis:
<br/><br/><img src="http://forum.featool.com/file/n808/modified_ellipsoid_axis_0_0_1.png" border="0"/><br/><br/>The ellipsoid can then be oriented as needed using the "axis" vector:
<br/><br/><img src="http://forum.featool.com/file/n808/reoriented_ellipsoid_axis_1_2_1.png" border="0"/><br/><br/>Maybe I am missing the significance of the "axis" vector... but until I figured it out, I was struggling to design an ellipsoid with the x/y/z/ dimensions that I intended.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
<br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/>
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-548Option to disable automatic postprocessing following solution2020-06-29T20:46:59Z2020-06-29T20:46:59Zrandress
I should say at the outset that this is a small thing. But it is a small thing that many might appreciate :-)
<br/><br/>It seems (so correct me, please) that the last postprocessing which was done on the current problem or on the previous problem solved is automatically done for the current problem immediately following the execution of the Solve step. For problems and plots which plot quickly this is not really an issue - after it is done, postprocessing can be set as desired and re-run.
<br/><br/>However, for some problems/plots it can take long enough to be annoying, especially when thinking (as I do - correct me if I am wrong) that it is performing unnecessary processing.
<br/><br/>I think I have discovered a crude workaround in creating an "fea" file "template" that has already set the Postprocessing Settings to not specify any plot at all. If I begin a problem by opening this file then the initial Solve execution does not do a plot but reports an error that there is nothing to plot :-)
<br/><br/>On subsequent re-solves if I again specify no plot before solving, then no plot is made and I am notified of the fact.
<br/><br/>I think what I would suggest is an option (not sure where) that, if selected, would display the Postprocessing Settings but would not generate the plot or simply place the Gui in he post processing mode.
<br/><br/>As I said this is not a biggie. Just a thought.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-508Slice-plane tool in Geometry Mode2020-06-18T09:48:43Z2020-06-18T09:48:43Zrandress
As explained in another thread ( <a href="http://forum.featool.com/Integration-of-Current-Density-over-Slice-Intersection-tp180p182.html" target="_top" rel="nofollow" link="external">http://forum.featool.com/Integration-of-Current-Density-over-Slice-Intersection-tp180p182.html</a> ) currently, a planar slice cannot be added during post processing such as might be used for integration:
<br/><blockquote class="quote dark-border-color"><div class="quote light-border-color">
<div class="quote-author" style="font-weight: bold;">Precise Simulation wrote</div>
<div class="quote-message">Boundary integration is only available on defined (external and internal) boundaries (not general cut planes). So in your case you would have to split the cylinders in half (or at the plane you want to perform the boundary integration). This should after meshing create internal boundaries that you now can select in the "Boundary Integration" dialog box (Switch to "Boundary" mode to see the boundary numbering, and toggle the "Interior Boundaries" check box in the lower left hand side of the "Boundary Settings" dialog box to see the numbering of internal boundaries).
<br/><br/>The reason for this (limitation) is that boundary integration is for both practical and accuracy reasons performed on selections of grid cell faces (or edges in 2D). And the way to ensure the grid generation algorithm does indeed mesh a reasonably smooth plane/boundary is to first define it in the geometry.
</div>
</div></blockquote>
In another thread ( <a href="http://forum.featool.com/Export-of-STEP-geometry-to-Gmsh-cut-with-plane-and-re-import-STEP-tp423p426.html" target="_top" rel="nofollow" link="external">http://forum.featool.com/Export-of-STEP-geometry-to-Gmsh-cut-with-plane-and-re-import-STEP-tp423p426.html</a> ) a method is outlined whereby the equivalent functionality may be accomplished in the Geometry mode:
<br/><blockquote class="quote dark-border-color"><div class="quote light-border-color">
<div class="quote-author" style="font-weight: bold;">Precise Simulation wrote</div>
<div class="quote-message shrinkable-quote">If your desired cutplane is aligned with the x, y, or z axis you should already be able to do this with the existing capabilities, as for example:
<br/><br/>1) Make an in-place copy of the object you want to split using the "Copy/Transform Object..." button or menu item.
<br/><br/>2) Create two blocks that touch along the plane you want to split, but extend a bit beyond the object in the other 5 directions/planes.
<br/><br/>3) Subtract one block from the orginal object, and the other from the copy.
<br/><br/>4) You should now be left with two halves of the original object split along the plane where the two blocks touched.
</div>
</div></blockquote>
Could this technique be implemented by a tool added to the Geometry Mode menu which would, for example, provide for the definition of a plane's perpendicular vector (x, y, z) and a contained point (x, y, z) which would then be used to bisect any/all selected objects? Perhaps a similar tool would be appropriate for the 2D and 1D modes.
<br/><br/>Kind regards,
<br/>Randal
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-372Suggestions for future release2020-04-23T17:32:15Z2020-04-23T17:32:15Ztkdiff
Here are a few suggestions for future updates:
<br/><br/>1. Is it necessary for the splash screen asking to decline or accept the license for licensed customers? I'm wondering if it could be eliminated if you have paid.
<br/><br/>2. Add the ability in postprocessing to permit modifications to the axes, such as semilog, log, scale, label, etc. I have found that if you change the pp value at all, it throws the plot off screen, and you cannot change the axes or display to retrieve it. For example, if you run a problem using large numbers and want to plot semilog instead of linear, you cannot do this
<br/><br/>3. If possible, an option to control/limit the output to the command log, to decrease verbosity of the output if desired. If repeating time step calculations, the log gets quite large.
<br/><br/>Thanks,
<br/>Tom
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-3703 suggestions (display while computing / periodic b.c. / superimpose grid)2020-04-23T05:38:47Z2020-04-23T05:38:47ZFrederic Moisy
Hi,
<br/><br/>Here are 3 new suggestions for future releases:
<br/><br/>1. Boundary settings dialog box : Add « periodic boundary conditions » (for a couple of faces or edges of equal size)
<br/><br/>2. During a time-dependent computation, it would be nice if the toolbox could display the current solution at each time step: if something wrong or unwanted happens during the computation we can decide to abort it before the end.
<br/><br/>3. Postprocessing: option to superimpose the grid to the displayed field
<br/><br/>Thank you!
<br/>Frederic
tag:forum.featool.com,2006:post-337Suggestions for grid and postprocessing2020-04-20T07:34:37Z2020-04-20T07:34:37ZFrederic Moisy
Hi,
<br/>I am a new user and enjoy very much the toolbox.
<br/>After a few days of use (with the Navier-Stokes solver only), I would like to make the following suggestions for future releases:
<br/> - in "Grid" mode, when clicking on "Refine", the displayed value in "Grid Size" (and the location of the cursor) is not updated.
<br/> - in "Postprocessing" Settings: it would be nice to add a "Scale Factor" for the arrow plot ; and display streamlines
<br/> - "Next/Prev" buttons or cursor to easily nagivate through time-dependent solutions (the "Solution" selection in the Postprocessing dialog box is not very convenient for this...)
<br/> - A new "Suggestions" subject in the FEATool forum
<br/>Sincerely
<br/>Frederic
<br/><br/>