Skip to content

Conversation

@DanielYankura
Copy link
Contributor

@DanielYankura DanielYankura commented Apr 10, 2025

Reason

  • Currently if a sideset and nodeset have the same ID libmesh will merge the two when making a nodeset from that sideset
  • New libmesh feature throws and error instead
  • Several MOOSE tests will fail when this gets fixed

Design

  • In named_entities.e and named_entities.xda nodesets were renumbered to avoid this
  • The AdvancedExtruderGenerator boundary swap test is commented out until the associated libmesh PR is merged

Impact

  • MOOSE tests won't fail with new libmesh PR

Must be merged before libMesh/libmesh#4121
refs #30085

- New libmesh feature throws and error when making a nodeset from a sideset if a nodeset with same ID exists
- named_entities meshes were changes to avoid this
- BoundaryInfo function now called in AdvancedExtruderGenerator that tells which sidesets should be excluded from this check

closes idaholab#30085
@DanielYankura
Copy link
Contributor Author

So @roystgnr recommended that I try to make my upgrade path a bit smoother. So I updated this PR so that it just updates the boundary IDs for two meshes and comments out one test that would otherwise fail once the associated libmesh PR is merged. That way after that PR is merge no tests should be failing and I can open another PR for MOOSE that uncomments out that one test and adds the function call needed to AdvancedExtruderGenerator.C.

@GiudGiud
Copy link
Contributor

Let’s not commit the back and forth to the repo

@DanielYankura DanielYankura force-pushed the overwriting_existing_nodeset branch from acd07f9 to cad658b Compare April 10, 2025 21:40
@DanielYankura
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just squashed my last two commits!

- removed call to add_equivalent_sideset from AdvancedExtruderGenerator.C
- added skip to corresponding extruder boudary swap test
- Two named_entities mesh files left the same
@DanielYankura DanielYankura force-pushed the overwriting_existing_nodeset branch from cad658b to 4e20226 Compare April 10, 2025 21:53
@DanielYankura
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just squashed that in as well!

@moosebuild
Copy link
Contributor

Job Documentation, step Docs: sync website on 4e20226 wanted to post the following:

View the site here

This comment will be updated on new commits.

@moosebuild
Copy link
Contributor

Job Coverage, step Generate coverage on 4e20226 wanted to post the following:

Framework coverage

f54877 #30291 4e2022
Total Total +/- New
Rate 85.30% 85.29% -0.01% -
Hits 109952 109941 -11 0
Misses 18952 18963 +11 0

Diff coverage report

Full coverage report

Modules coverage

Coverage did not change

Full coverage reports

Reports

This comment will be updated on new commits.

@GiudGiud GiudGiud merged commit e30874d into idaholab:next Apr 11, 2025
50 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants