What is my type of finite element problem?

Introduction

From a simple 2D case to a full 3D model representing a complex electromagnetic device, the finite element problems may be drastically different and does not require always the same needs in terms of computation resources.

Several questions are frequently asked and depend on the finite element problem:
  • Should I use parametric distribution to decrease the solving time?
  • Should I use the solver parallelization to decrease solving time?
This document orients the user to find the best way to decrease efficiently its computation time.

For Flux 2D and Flux Skew, the recommended linear solver is Direct (MUMPS) for all the configurations.

Table 1. Table summarizing the different cases of a Flux 2D project in terms of mesh and parametric distribution
  Mesh size Number of parameters in the scenario Use of parametric distribution Use of solver parallelization
Flux 2D 0-100k 0-10 No No
0-100k 10 + Yes, single machine or cluster Yes, see recommandations
100k + 0-10 No No
100k + 10 + Yes, single machine or cluster Yes, see recommandations
Table 2. Table summarizing the different cases of a Flux Skew project in terms of mesh and parametric distribution
  Mesh size

(extruded geometry)

 Use of solver parallelization
Flux Skew 0-300k No
300k + Yes, see recommandations
Table 3. Table summarizing the different cases of a Flux 3D project in terms of mesh and parametric distribution
  Mesh size Number of parameters in the scenario Use of parametric distribution Use of solver parallelization Solver
Flux 3D 0-75k 0-10 No No Direct (MUMPS)
0-75k 10+ Yes, single machine or cluster No Direct (MUMPS)
75k-150k 0-10 No Yes, see recommandations Direct (MUMPS)
75k-150k 10+ Yes, single machine or cluster Yes, see recommandations Direct (MUMPS)
150k+ 0-10 No Yes, see recommandations Iterative (PETSc)
150k+ 10+ Yes, single machine or cluster Yes, see recommandations Iterative (PETSc)