[yt-dev] Gadget status

Chris Malone chris.m.malone at gmail.com
Wed Jul 16 07:56:12 PDT 2014 

Indeed, we were seeing several of the 'Failed to split.' messages.  I don't
know enough about the kD-tree stuff to know whether or not that was a
game-breaker.  It didn't throw an error during split_grid, so I assumed it
was still going about its business.


On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 5:41 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Sam Skillman <samskillman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > VR for particle-based simulations doesn't currently work, but I'm not
> > entirely sure why. At some point I thought we could render the deposited
> > fields but I haven't checked/tried in a while.
>
> My recollection is that it's unrelated to the camera interface, but is
> instead something with the kD-tree trying to split octs
> (unsuccessfully), which affects RAMSES and ART data as well.
>
> >
> > As Cameron mentioned, we're moving towards a new (and hopefully better!)
> > camera system (albeit slowly due to me being away from this for a while),
> > but the timescale on that is not set in stone. I expect the new camera
> > interface will first be implemented for grid-based datasets. Then we can
> > hopefully have others that are more familiar with rendering options for
> > particle datasets help implement new methods that are beyond just
> particle
> > splatting.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sam
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Chris Malone <chris.m.malone at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, thanks guys.  I figured that was the case with VR, but wanted to
> >> double check.
> >>
> >> The field docs will be a great boon; as it is, things are quite
> confusing.
> >>
> >> Nice talk Nathan!
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I don't think VR is working for particle-based datasets as of yet.  The
> >>> volume rendering interface is being redesigned right now, but its
> release
> >>> has been postponed until yt 3.1 unfortunately.  When it is released it
> will
> >>> handle all particle-based datasets as well as grid-based datasets.
> >>>
> >>> I know Matt is working on the field docs right now, so they should be
> >>> ready somewhat soon.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <
> nathan12343 at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Chris Malone <
> chris.m.malone at gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback, Nathan.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In slices, I was plotting 'all_density', which is a 'deposit' field.
> >>>>> I'll try looking at 'Gas_smoothed_density' ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ('deposit', 'all_density') uses nearest neighbor deposition.  There's
> >>>> also ('deposit', 'all_cic') which does cloud-in-cell.
> >>>>
> >>>> ('deposit', 'Gas_smoothed_density') is aliased to ('gas', 'density')
> or
> >>>> just 'density'.  This way we can access gas fields in an SPH dataset
> just
> >>>> like with a grid dataset.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll see about getting permission to pass along the dataset.  For the
> >>>>> time being, do you know of any notebook or cookbook recipe that
> shows how to
> >>>>> do this for particle data?  I couldn't seem to find anything.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, there's an example in the docs using tipsy data:
> >>>>
> http://yt-project.org/docs/dev-3.0/examining/loading_data.html#tipsy-data
> >>>>
> >>>> I also went into a bit of depth about working with SPH data in my
> scipy
> >>>> talk: www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNkN7nyj4nE
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't think there's an example of volume rendering SPH data floating
> >>>> around, thus my uncertainty about it working or not.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Chris
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
> >>>>> <nathan12343 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Chris Malone
> >>>>>> <chris.m.malone at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Caveat: I'm not that familiar with particle-based datasets/codes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm unsuccessfully trying to help a summer student do some
> >>>>>>> visualization of someone else's Gadget binary data dump.  What is
> the status
> >>>>>>> of volume rendering SPH/Gadget data in 3.0?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Not sure about volume rendering.  I believe it should work for
> >>>>>> particle/octree data but haven't tried it recently.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When I've tried what I know works for grid-based data, the returned
> >>>>>>> image is simply empty.  Projections look okay (for some
> variables), and
> >>>>>>> Slices look worse as there are blank splotches, likely due to
> emptiness in
> >>>>>>> the tree.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What field are you slicing?  There shouldn't be empty spots for SPH
> >>>>>> smoothed fields.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Also, is there a list somewhere that describes/defines what the
> >>>>>>> various fluid types mean (e.g. 'all', 'gas', 'deposit', etc)?  If
> not, it
> >>>>>>> might be nice to have somewhere in the docs.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There are several open issues about this. We won't be releasing
> yt-3.0
> >>>>>> until these docs are written.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 'all' is the union that contains all particle data.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 'gas' (lowercase g) corresponds to SPH smoothed quantities for
> Gadget.
> >>>>>> In binary datasets, the Gas particle type corresponds to the gas
> particles.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 'deposit' corresponds to fields that are deposited onto the octree
> >>>>>> mesh using a particle type. The SPH smoothed fields are actually
> defined
> >>>>>> here, 'gas' is just an alias to the smoothed deposition fields.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you have more specific questions (even better if you have an
> >>>>>> example script and a dataset) one of us should be able to help you
> out more.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Nathan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Chris
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> yt-dev mailing list
> >>>>>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >>>>>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> yt-dev mailing list
> >>>>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >>>>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> yt-dev mailing list
> >>>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >>>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> yt-dev mailing list
> >>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Cameron Hummels
> >>> Postdoctoral Researcher
> >>> Steward Observatory
> >>> University of Arizona
> >>> http://chummels.org
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> yt-dev mailing list
> >>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > yt-dev mailing list
> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20140716/7a1b3512/attachment.htm>

More information about the yt-dev mailing list