Jump to content
Dillon Buhl

error combining parameter sweep results

Recommended Posts

I'm having a problem with the parameter sweep macro in Cadfeko/Postfeko.

 

The model creation and solver portion of the macro generates the cfx files and runs the models ok, no problem there. I have an issue when the "combine results" macro is run in Postfeko; either when it's run "automatically" on completion of the Feko solver or if I run "combine_parameter_sweep_results" in the script editor. In some cases, the results files are combined properly in Postfeko and everything is fine, but in about half the sweeps that I've tried to run, the macro fails with:

 

------ Running combine_parameter_sweep_results ------
Found 1 NearFields(s)
Found 1 Power(s)
.\shared_helper.lua:116: Error 18111: The number of values on the axis must be the same as the number of data sets provided.

 

shared_helper.lua line 116 is just:

115 function error( message )
116     error_( CleanMessage( message ) )
117 end

 

I've tried to debug, but I can't find the error code listed anywhere, and generally can't figure out what's going wrong or what's different between the sweeps that work and those that don't. I've had this failure on sweeps of different variables--geometry-related and medium-parameter-related.

 

Really need to get this fixed, so I can continue with this work. Of course happy to provide more information and upload more files, but I've started here by attaching the .cfx files as well as the .xml generated by the macro for a sweep of the conductivity value for scattering from an infinite dielectric cylinder. Any help will be greatly appreciated!

error_screen_shot.JPG

inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond_03.cfx inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond_04.cfx inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond_original.cfx inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond.xml inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond_01.cfx inf_cyl_pbc_variable_cond_02.cfx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dillon,
Could you please send us more information from the parameter sweeps that you tried could not reproduce the problem with the current attached xml file. Which version of Feko was used with the script.
image.thumb.png.cbdab4dd150a7f29d8ae4f48e89b43d7.png

Regards

Dewald Botes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dewald, thanks very much for your reply and for running the files. I've run into the error using both HyperWorks/FEKO 2018 and 2019. Really interesting that you were able to get the results from my models to combine.

 

I'll try to create another set of results that don't properly combine on my machine, but it'll take a bit of doing. I did this short conductivity sweep as a test of the problem; other existing sweeps where I've run into the problem have more parameter values and take a while (day/days on a pc) to run. Another test sweep I tried to run today predictably combined properly and didn't experience the failure.

 

Could you tell me a little about how you generated the combined results? Were you able to run the "Parameter sweep: Combine results" macro in Postfeko without error? Does your "Scattered Field_Sweep" combined data set allow plotting against the conductivity value on the independent axis?

 

I'm also a bit interested in the fact that you have data sets "ScatteredField_sweep_1,2,3". In the parameter sweeps I've performed that have successfully combined results, I don't see the *_1,2,3,.. files being generated; I just have a single ScatteredField_sweep file. Just maybe indicates some difference in how the sweep was run...
 

best,

Dillon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dillon,
I just used the normal combine macro in POSTFEKO. Before combining results using the macro it is important to check if the results converged. After the combination one result is created in stored data for each request in the original model. The _1 results is just a copy of the total sweep single result to show all the results.
The "cond" variable is  also available is an independent axis.
image.thumb.png.0be2a6a0dd2fbf324398532c8654d3f7.png

Regards

Dewald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks again Dewald. That's what I figured/was afraid of. Not sure why it's worked for you and not on my system. But the fact that results from those cfx files can be combined is useful info for debugging. I'll dig into my output files when I get a chance to see if something's going wrong in the solver.

 

best,

Dillon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...