Hi Spencer, hi Asim,


It should be possible to output the mean mode during the simulation using the master branch,

but I think this functionality is not in the latest release (v4.3.5).


This can be done using the following filter:

  <FILTER TYPE="FieldConvert">
      <PARAM NAME="OutputFile">meanmode.fld</PARAM>
      <PARAM NAME="OutputFrequency">100</PARAM>
      <PARAM NAME="Modules"> meanmode </PARAM>
  </FILTER>
this will create a sequence of files meanmode_*_fc.fld, which you can convert to .vtu as usual.


Cheers,

Douglas

From: Sherwin, Spencer J
Sent: 11 January 2017 09:30:47
To: Asım Önder
Cc: nektar-users; Serson, Douglas
Subject: Re: [Nektar-users] checkpoint fields
 
Hi Asim,

It was good to meet last week.  The bak0 extension is when the file already exists and so rather than overwriting it we have introduced a copy mechanism to save a backup. 

I am not sure why we do not have any documentation on this however. Probably we should mark that as an issue so something is added.

On another topic I was talking to Dave Moxey and he believes it should already be possible to dump the mean modes whist running through  the filter mechanism. Since we have moved the FieldConvert modules into a library (libFieldUtils) they are now accessible from the solvers. 

@Doulgas could you suggest what the filter xml options should look like to output the mean mode every XXX steps? 

Cheers,
Spencer

PS Dave also confirmed that dumping all the Fourier points at a location in the 2.5D code is a good idea and he had used it during his thesis but we do not have anything immediately setup for this. 


On 9 Jan 2017, at 06:25, Asım Önder <asim.onder@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear all,

I've recently updated my local Nektar++ version to the latest one in the repository. In this new version, it looks like there are some changes in checkpoint filter. In particular, once in a while the code writes out chk files with a "bak0" extension. What would this extension supposed to mean? I did some research but couldn't find.

I also noticed that the chk file for the same time instance is slightly larger compared to its "bak0" counterpart and to the rest of the fields, for instance:

62G    config_22.chk
62G    config_23.chk
62G    config_24.bak0.chk
64G    config_24.chk
62G    config_25.chk
62G    config_26.chk
62G    config_27.chk
62G    config_28.chk
62G    config_29.chk
62G    config_30.chk
62G    config_31.chk
62G    config_32.chk
62G    config_33.chk
62G    config_34.chk
62G    config_35.chk
62G    config_36.chk
62G    config_37.chk
62G    config_38.bak0.chk
64G    config_38.chk


It is now a little confusing, which one to keep, bak0 version or the other version, i.e. should I delete for example config_38.bak0.chk or config_38.chk?

I'd appreciate any feedback on this.

Best,
Asim
_______________________________________________
Nektar-users mailing list
Nektar-users@imperial.ac.uk
https://mailman.ic.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/nektar-users

Spencer  Sherwin
McLaren Racing/Royal Academy of Engineering Research Chair, 
Professor of Computational Fluid Mechanics,
Department of Aeronautics,
Imperial College London
South Kensington Campus
London SW7 2AZ

+44 (0) 20 759 45052