Personal tools
You are here: Home Forum Extension of the platform User suggestions for improvement

User suggestions for improvement

Up to Extension of the platform

User suggestions for improvement

Posted by claus andersen at September 26. 2009

I though the developers might want some suggestions from some of us users from the internets :)

This is not a 'please make Salomé act like SolidWorks' thread, but rather suggestions for small improvements which are not that hard to implement (might be, I'm not a programmer)

I'll kick it off:

* The ability to rotate and move an object without pressing CTRL while still being able to select; selecting with left mouse button (MB), rotating with the middle MB, etc.. Or just the ability to define it yourself. This is one of my pet peeves.

* Able to release an object from it's parents; at the moment the geo. module may be filled with hundreds of object used to create an object, and the only way to clear it up a bit, is to export the object, delete the 'tool-objects' and import it again. 

*(salome-meca): a simple 'browse' button where you select which version of Code_Aster you want as a solver - right now you have to write the path manually.

* 3 built in vectors: I always start by creating 3 vectors with the origin O, x,y,z respectively.

* Ability to extrude faces et al without having to explode the object.

 

That all for now, I might update later on.

I hope someone else will kick in ideas and suggestions.

And of course thanks to the developers for listening to us and making Salomé available to us :)

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Vadim SANDLER at September 28. 2009

Hello Claus,

Thank you for your interest in the evolving of SALOME platform. We are always glad to get fresh ideas about possible improvement of the platform. And one of this forum's goals is to collect such feedbacks from the SALOME users.

Be sure,  we will take into account your suggestions in some of the future versions of SALOME platform.

Regards,
Vadim.

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Cacciatorino at October 01. 2009

GEOMETRY:

 

1) It should be easier to create modify a solid, for example modify diameter or lenght of a cylinder after it has been created. The use of parametrized sketches and drive-dimensions would be the best!

2) If I modify a solid (for example: adding a fillet to an edge) Salome create a new entity. What is wrong on this? If I already meshed the solid, I cannot update the mesh itself based on the just modified geometry, I have to create a new mesh based on the new created solid. This is a big waste of time if the mesh is complex and I already defined 2d-3d groups on then mesh. The right behavìour should be to add these features inside the "father" solid, so the mesh module can work on the same "upper-level-part" (i hope you understand what I mean). My cad package act this way: when I work on assemblies, I can modify the geometry of a single component, but relationship beetwen solids at level assembly are not borken because it create not a new solid, it works on the same solid.

 

Mesh:

I'm not able to create hexa mesh on not simple geometries, I don'y know if this happens because I'm not skilled enough or it is due to limitation of the software, I have a friend that is able to create such kind of meshes even if the body is complicated, using Hypermesh (a 10.000 euros software!)

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Christoph Hossfeld at October 01. 2009

I think, the mesh im- and export can be optimized. I am thinking of are more suitable format like the gmsh (msh) format, which is easy to understand and which well understood in many applications. An im- and export in this format would help a lot.

 

Also an automatic boundary layer method like engrid has, would be a great shot forward.

 

Christoph

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by ppeetteerr at October 05. 2009

Just a couple of hints on this. For the 1st one I believe that there is a Salome-Notebook which allows you to create parametric models, including sketches. In the windows version you can actually do this after you've created the model. I assume its comming to linux shortly.

For your 2nd point. Try creating multiple meshes and then combing the meshes into a compound. This way when you rework your part/mesh you don't loose everything.  This also prevents you from having to create a compound of the geometry befoere hand as well. Also "Dump study" is a pretty powerful tool

Previously Cacciatorino wrote:

GEOMETRY:

 

1) It should be easier to create modify a solid, for example modify diameter or lenght of a cylinder after it has been created. The use of parametrized sketches and drive-dimensions would be the best!

2) If I modify a solid (for example: adding a fillet to an edge) Salome create a new entity. What is wrong on this? If I already meshed the solid, I cannot update the mesh itself based on the just modified geometry, I have to create a new mesh based on the new created solid. This is a big waste of time if the mesh is complex and I already defined 2d-3d groups on then mesh. The right behavìour should be to add these features inside the "father" solid, so the mesh module can work on the same "upper-level-part" (i hope you understand what I mean). My cad package act this way: when I work on assemblies, I can modify the geometry of a single component, but relationship beetwen solids at level assembly are not borken because it create not a new solid, it works on the same solid.

 

Mesh:

I'm not able to create hexa mesh on not simple geometries, I don'y know if this happens because I'm not skilled enough or it is due to limitation of the software, I have a friend that is able to create such kind of meshes even if the body is complicated, using Hypermesh (a 10.000 euros software!)

 

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by mihe at October 06. 2009

Good post, I have some wishes too:

Black element edges + white background for print out to documents.
I have already been promised that this will be included in 5.1.3. I would like to add that in some pre/post software there is an option at the dump view buttom that changes the background and element edges only for the captured picture (in that way you can work in the gui with whatever color that you like and the pictures for your documents will be ok anyway)
Also, possibillity to capture picture to cliboard is nice. It speeds up working on your reports.

A mesh hypotesis that can specify max relation of element edge size of adjacent elements. In that way you automatically get a smooth transition from refined mesh to a coarse mesh.

The possibillity to change the color bar from "blue to red" to "red to blue". It is nice when plotting safety factors.

Average or smoothing of aster elno results(select info button). I have noticed that if you plot elno results and use the select info function on nodes. You get the last elno result that salome have stored for that node. Preferable I would like info of all elno results for that node and a averaged value or a smoothended value. I realize that smoothing of results may be hard (I dont know how it is "commonly" done. I think abaqusCAE have some sort of treshhold value for how to exclude diverging values from the averageing) 

Possibility to create post view with only some elements by just pickning them (instead of using already defined groups in input+use only group) 

Possibility to create group of shellelements by picking one and specifying a face angle criteria to propagate to neighbouring elements.

Possibility to convert element groups to node groups and the other way around.

I would like to be able to see the real node/element numbers as defined in the .unv/.mail/... file not the salome internal id number. For example when probing displacement/stress results.

I also have not understood how delete free nodes. I now you can highlight them but how do I delete them?

Also a smoothing function for elements of kind "straighten edge". If you work on a mesh without geometry it is nice to roughly fix errors in your mesh and then straighten the element edges to make them more nice. You can do it now by converting to linear elements and then back, but it would be nice to be able to ably it to only a few elements.

Also when building second order elements it is nice to have the option just to specify the corners nodes and then automatically have the midside nodes made for you (then you manually just have to check cracks/coinciding nodes).

Finally a measurement tool for x,y,z distance and vector length.

Maybe some of this can already be done...I just have too figure out how.

Anyway 5.1.2 is really good improvement!

/Micke

 

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Claes Fredö at October 08. 2009

Hi

I am fairly new at using Salome, and therefore, occasionally, end up doing some of the work outside Salome.

The group creation and naming work style in Salome and it reuse in Aster is quite nice. However, when I fail doing exatctly what I want 100% in Salome, I end up with a broken flow, where I must import a 'stupid mesh' into the Mesh module and there manually create the groups I want.

To do this, I use the simplest approach there is - offset node/element numbering. The Group Creation tool has the function that it can Filter ID numbers that match or do not match a specific number the user inputs.

Suggestions:

1) Expanding this Filter option with LowerNumber <= Range <= UpperRange would simplify this type of manual group creation.

2) Another Feature that would be useful for Group creation would be to automatically import some of the supported Mesh format's Material and/or Property sets as groups, i.e. much in the same way the MED format creates groups on export.

Last. A question. 

A) Geometry=>Mesh Group data is used in the Eficas section. Are there any plans to propagate this information into Eficas?

My experience so far is that much of the model debugging when running Salome ties in with Geometry groups that are not always propagated into the MED file. Not being 'blind' when using Groups would help.

 

Cheers

Claes 

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Claes Fredö at October 09. 2009

Hi again

On 2nd thought - it is perhaps best to mention that I am using Slaome 4.1.4 as a part of CAELINUX2009.

One more suggestion:

3) I believe that a possibility to Copy/Paste Groups would be useful in all modules.

/Claes

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by claus andersen at October 13. 2009

Couldn't edit my post so:

Make Salome disregard case of extensions - i.e. x.STEP is the same as x.step

Making Salome compatible with the gmsh for (import/export) would indeed be useful as mentioned.

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Brennan Sharp at October 14. 2009

Support of the 3D Connexion SpaceNavigator (and family) would be nice. Although the product can use the vendor's proprietary driver software, there's a compatible open-source alternative at http://spacenav.sourceforge.net/

 

Cheers,

Brennan

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by ppeetteerr at October 15. 2009

Either incorporate and interactive python shell such as IPYTHON. or allow the use of the native python shell in salome

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by MauritiusRay at October 15. 2009

Sorry if it exists already, but I only started and could'nt find them, so simply having keyboard shortcuts for tools, if possible customizeable would be nice.

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by MauritiusRay at October 15. 2009

Again sorry if it exists: direct and fast drawing of curves à la flash,inkscape, illustrator, etc... without having to draw each point would be important

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Claes Fredö at October 17. 2009

Previously Claes Fredö wrote:

Hi again

On 2nd thought - it is perhaps best to mention that I am using Slaome 4.1.4 as a part of CAELINUX2009.

One more suggestion:

3) I believe that a possibility to Copy/Paste Groups would be useful in all modules.

/Claes

Anoher  'improvement' would be to introduce an option of the XYZ axis vectors to be x% of the sie for the  bounding box of the current view.

/Claes

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Claes Fredö at October 17. 2009

Previously Claes Fredö wrote:

Previously Claes Fredö wrote:

Hi again

On 2nd thought - it is perhaps best to mention that I am using Slaome 4.1.4 as a part of CAELINUX2009.

One more suggestion:

3) I believe that a possibility to Copy/Paste Groups would be useful in all modules.

/Claes

Anoher  'improvement' would be to introduce an option of the XYZ axis vectors to be x% of the sie for the  bounding box of the current view.

/Claes

Hi

Salome has a lot of good stuff on Sewing and merging nodes/elements.

However, I have not been able to find any function where one can split two meshes after having joined/sewed/merged them.

A function that allows meshes to be split along a line/face and automatically  provides new Node/Element groups would be nice.


Sincerely

Claes

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Michael Kiefer at November 13. 2009

Previously pete Halverson wrote:

Just a couple of hints on this. For the 1st one I believe that there is a Salome-Notebook which allows you to create parametric models, including sketches. In the windows version you can actually do this after you've created the model. I assume its comming to linux shortly.

For your 2nd point. Try creating multiple meshes and then combing the meshes into a compound. This way when you rework your part/mesh you don't loose everything.  This also prevents you from having to create a compound of the geometry befoere hand as well. Also "Dump study" is a pretty powerful tool

I have just tried this and encountered some strange thing when meshing Solids. They do not seem to have parent objects if I mesh single solids. I can not "Add Groups from Geometry" to them either. :(

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Michael Kiefer at November 13. 2009

Previously Michael Kiefer wrote:

Previously pete Halverson wrote:

Just a couple of hints on this. For the 1st one I believe that there is a Salome-Notebook which allows you to create parametric models, including sketches. In the windows version you can actually do this after you've created the model. I assume its comming to linux shortly.

For your 2nd point. Try creating multiple meshes and then combing the meshes into a compound. This way when you rework your part/mesh you don't loose everything.  This also prevents you from having to create a compound of the geometry befoere hand as well. Also "Dump study" is a pretty powerful tool


I have just tried this and encountered some strange thing when meshing Solids. They do not seem to have parent objects if I mesh single solids. I can not "Add Groups from Geometry" to them either. :(

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by jouke hijlkema at November 13. 2009

OK my 5 cents. Make popups remember where they where before so they don' t open smack in the middle. It's annoying to have to move them out of the way every time

 

Jouke

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by mihe at November 26. 2009

Some more ideas:

I would like to be able to copy-paste values displayed by select tool 

When creating new elements manually they disappear from the screen. I  would like new created element to stay visible.

Something is wrong with seg2 elements. If I have seg2 elements and export an unv file and then import it again, then the modify mesh linear to quadratic does not work. I think that the unv seg2 element exported from salome may not be according to unv file format. Perhaps this is part of the problem.

I have posted it elsewhere also but received no response so here I go again:
scalar map and deformed shape does not work for elno results(the results are not correct) (scalar map though works for elno).

One really cool feature would be to be able to mesh 3d mesh inside a given a closed surface mesh.

Kind regards/Micke

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by BrendaEM at December 01. 2009

Hi,

The major improvements I want are are in compatibility and ease of installation:

1.) The ability for Salome to be easier to prebuild for .debs or apt-get, meaning also that less complicated scripting might have to be created for the installation process.

2.) The ability for Salome to live happily in the usr/share/salome, like many other fine Linux software.

3.) The ability for Salome to check for such things as Code_aster and Code_saturn, and others--on startup, so that it may indeed be modular and pre-buildable.

4.) More modern depends, such as compilers, making its use on modern distributions, more likely, with less depends scrounging.

5.) List the entire dependacy tree.

6.) Rethink the OpenCascade license.

7.) Create an output window inside the program in addition to the python window so that Salome can be launched without a text window also being launched. I have accidental left Salome 4.x text windows open, not releasing memory back to the system.

8.) Add an option to shut off the python window.

10.) Test the Salome installation on a particular platform, such as Ubuntu or Debian.

11.) Add a volumetric visualisation mode for post-pro, as seen in Paraview.

Oddly, I have a suggestion for a deprovement: Consider stop development on the 32 bit version of Salome. Is is too much to require a 64bit computer to do scientific research.

 

Re: User suggestions for improvement

Posted by Cacciatorino at January 24. 2010

NOTEBOOK

 

1) It could be interesting to add a third column to the window where the variables are definied, where to plase a text string of description of what that varaible is.

 

2) A little help on how to create equations of variables.

 

 

Powered by Ploneboard
Document Actions