rough_wood wrote:The code may change to Fortran.
We don't have any commercial CFD software access here afaik, just wind tunnels.Greenish wrote:If you in fact need a highly parallel supercomputer to solve your problem sufficiently, then by all means don't let them scare you off of fortran... it is highly optimized for numerical computation, especially on those architectures. And for computationally minded folks (as opposed to the computer science minded) it's somewhat more straightforward than more general-purpose languages.
However - if you want to play with algorithms, sticking with relatively small problems (under a few hours computation on a fast workstation) then you're probably going to be much more agile if you can use matlab (or the free version, octave). You don't have to do as much bottom-up work and can focus on the problem at hand.
Then if you get all the pieces working and it's just going to be too slow to do some huge optimization problem with matlab, then you can port it to the big machine and parallelize it as you go, but at least you'll know the core parts work on their own and can focus on scaling at that point.
Great advice. I'll stick with Matlab until I know it isn't cutting it. Plus by then I should have a little Fortran experience based on the funded research I'm doing.
To bring this back to racing-related applications, I know lots of programs are capable of doing thermal/mechanical analysis of brake rotors. For example, I use CFdesign at work, and know it is capable of modeling this kind of thing to a point (i.e. you would have to give it a power dissipation number, but it could calculate the conductive, convective and radiative effects). If you want to get into the chemistry of the pads, or the structural parts, some kind of multiphysics software would probably be needed. Have you considered using an off-the-shelf (possibly open-source) program, and if it doesn't have its own optimizer, wrapping it in a script? I'm not sure how custom or into the weeds of the analysis you intend to go.
A few things, before I run off to work-rough_wood wrote:What's wrong with Fortran? I'm not a software/computer guy, so please educate me. The reason I'd see possibly doing it is Matlab is horrible when it comes to loops, and in order to have a small step size/large number of elements that greatly increases the number of loops required. Also, I don't think our "supercomputer" run Matlab code. Switching to Fortran would enable an immense jump in computing power due to the code and circumstances.
Plus I thought Fortran was free, isn't it? Matlab isn't free to most people here. Let alone if I use a command that happens to be in some special toolbox.
Let me know. Thanks!
Most engineering codes are based on FORTRAN programming language. I think you have that and NASTRAN and some others. But those two were the main engineering programming languages they told me about when I was in school.Jersey Tom wrote:rough_wood wrote:The code may change to Fortran.
Stick to MATLAB or Octave for future engineering familiarity and accessibility, and "dabbling" in a program here like this.
Though I'll admit at some point in my career I'll probably want to get some NumPy experience... focus on what has broad application.
Some years ago yes, FORTRAN was pretty standard in engineering work. Since then... in my experience you run into it with ancient legacy code or if you have a huge project where you really need computational horsepower.n smikle wrote:Most engineering codes are based on FORTRAN programming language. I think you have that and NASTRAN and some others. But those two were the main engineering programming languages they told me about when I was in school.
You may want to check with manufacturers of aircraft brakes. High temperature composite brakes are well known to them, and I bet they developed quite a few proprietary tools over the years.rough_wood wrote:Are there good examples of similar writings that already exist?