Hi Matt First - really sorry for having inflicted this on you. I agree that there are many problems with the format and it’s not like the world needs a new file format. I only happened to use it for a case where there was an existing toolchain…which I’m now rewriting anyhow.
What is your current least detested file format for FEM that plays nicely with DMPlex? Exodus II? Dharmendar - you might just want to write a simple translation script if you are locked into gmsh for some reason. It is also a pain that the format does not work with paraview and other common tools out of the box. Cheers Gerard On 11 Jan 2014, at 01:14, Matthew Knepley <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Dharmendar Reddy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hello, I have a question and feature request regarding DMPlexCreateGmsh. Gmsh, mesh format outputs, physical regions in the mesh as For example in the a particular 2 d mesh with eight physical regions it may look like the one below $PhysicalNames 8 1 1 "RegionName1" 1 2 "RegionName2" 1 3 "RegionName3" 2 4 "RegionName4" 2 5 "RegionName5" 2 6 "RegionName6" 2 7 "RegionName7" 2 8 "RegionName8" $EndPhysicalNames It would be nice to have the DMPLexCreateGmsh process this information. The first number in each row of name is the topological dimension (tdim), If the code can group all the regions with dimension < mesh dimension (meshDim) as "Boundary" and all regions with dimension = meshDimension as "Region" Gmsh outputs (if requested) the lower dimension cells in regions with tdim < meshDim. If interpolate mesh is enabled, i would like to have cells of boundary region, which in the above example will be lines and points, included in the boundary strata with global numbering for the facets. I really hate GMsh right now. The format is a complete cluster of idiocy. They allow outputting facets as separate lower-dimensional cells, unconnected to the original cell, so we would have to initiate a search for every insertion. Not to mention that sizes are not declared up front so that we have to run through the file in multiple passes. I really really hate these guys. Is there an overwhelming reason to waste my time messing around with a format designed by the mentally infirm? I am willing to listen to reason, but reading Gmsh files would make anyone unreasonably angry. Matt This ways the total number of Cells in the mesh will be : NumNodes + NumLines+ NumTriangles or NumNodes+ NumTriangles (if interpolate is off) In the Current implementation, correct me if i am wrong, I see the the total number of cells = numNodes + (some Lines which are elements of the lower dimensional regions) + numTriangles Thanks Reddy -- -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener
