Postby **bernd** » Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:51 pm

A problem which has to be solved by any community project where noone pays the devs ...

Some history first ... In early times of FEM only CalculiX was supported, and all solver handling inside inputfile writer. This module grow and grow. At some point the solver handling code was extracted from the writer but totally dependent on CalculiX. From time to time there where disscusions about other solver. I decided to make the solver binary handling solver independent. For this I used the only open source solver I knew from my students time, Z88. Since no one really used Z88 it still only has very limited support for BCs and only reads deformations. CalculiX envolved the time beeing. Than HoWil came to the forum and asked for Elmer. He even organised a GSoC to support Elmer. In this GSoC a totally new frame work for solver handling was written and z88 as well as calculix where ported to this frame work. But since not all calculix tools are implemented in this fram work the ccxtools still remain. Calculix solver and Ccxtools solver create the same input file. I never used Elmer. I even do not know the syntax (slowly get into). I even do not need all this none mechanical stuff. I would need mixed edge shell analysis which is not good in calculix. But I never finished something in this regard. Harry started a new solver OOFEM, than gave up. I did the mistake to have a look at it and thus we had another solver up. It is mot in master, but rebased regularly. One can say this branch is the tutorial to add a new solver. This is what ebrahim did, he added OpenSees, which is great in earth quake and good for edge and shell analysis. Perfect for me, but no development ATM. Furthermore it is not free for comercial use, which is a problem for me. This is where we are ATM.

As written I will not do any big afford in this jusr if some one will do spend time on this I surely help with implementation.

In the regard of bring all together in one solver. Might be true and much more efficient but as long as you do not pay people you can not tell them what they have to develop.

I myself am really happy about the GSoC we do at the moment as it finds errors and makes what is really needed, examples.

cheers bernd