-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
FElupe Submission #212
Comments
Editor in Chief checksHi @adtzlr! Thank you for submitting your package for pyOpenSci review. Below are the basic checks that your package needs to pass to begin our review. Please check our Python packaging guide for more information on the elements below.
Editor commentsYour package is already in great shape! Congratulation! Here some clarifications about the unchecked boxes:
Once those items are fixed we probably already have an editor for your submission... 🚀 |
Thank you very much @cmarmo for the basic checks and your detailed comments on what is missing. I'll enhance the mentioned files and add the missing issue templates. Thank you also for your kind words on the docs ✍🏻! The graphical examples are implemented by PyVista for Sphinx and Sphinx-Gallery - its plot-directive is a really great feature. ... ⌛⌛⌛ ... Note: All items are fixed! 🎉🎉🎉
|
Thank you @adtzlr for your prompt reaction! |
Thank you @tkoyama010 for taking your time to serve as an editor for this review, that's great 🥳 🚀. If you have any initial questions, please let me know! |
@cmarmo I have completed the review by taking over your checklist. Please tell us the flow from here. |
Thank you @tkoyama010 for following-up! Now the hard part will start... We need to look for reviewers for the package. |
Hey @cmarmo and @tkoyama010! In the meantime we prepared a draft paper 📝 for JOSS (meanwhile located in a private repo 🔒). Do you think it is okay to already include it in the FElupe-repo or better wait until the PyOpenSci review is finished? Why do you require that the paper must be ...in the package root or in 🙏🏻 Thank you! 🙏🏻 |
Please, add the paper to the repo, so our reviewers can have a look at it, this will speed up things for the JOSS submission.
euh .... 🤔 I cannot find an explanation for that... I suggest you to follow JOSS requirements, while we clarify this. Thank you! |
Hi @tkoyama010, @cmarmo! The draft for the FElupe JOSS-paper is ready and it is included in the repo |
@adtzlr Sorry about review process has been delayed. We are currently try to find reviewers. Please wait a little longer. |
Thank you for the information @tkoyama010 - I'm looking forward to go through the review process ☕️. |
Hello @cmarmo, I think I can review this submission, but could you explain the process to me? Does it follow JOSS guidelines? |
@nicoguaro |
@nicoguaro |
@tkoyama010, I think I have got it after reading the guide. If I have some question, I can ask them here. I will start my review but it will take me some time since we are closing the semester and have a master thesis to review in my queue. |
@nicoguaro Package ReviewPlease check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below. Your review is not limited to these topics, as described in the reviewer guide
DocumentationThe package includes all the following forms of documentation:
Readme file requirements
The README should include, from top to bottom:
NOTE: If the README has many more badges, you might want to consider using a table for badges: see this example. Such a table should be more wide than high. (Note that the a badge for pyOpenSci peer-review will be provided upon acceptance.)
UsabilityReviewers are encouraged to submit suggestions (or pull requests) that will improve the usability of the package as a whole.
Functionality
For packages also submitting to JOSS
Note: Be sure to check this carefully, as JOSS's submission requirements and scope differ from pyOpenSci's in terms of what types of packages are accepted. The package contains a
Final approval (post-review)
Estimated hours spent reviewing: Review Comments
|
Submitting Author: Andreas Dutzler (@adtzlr)
All current maintainers: (@adtzlr)
Package Name: FElupe
One-Line Description of Package: Finite element analysis for continuum mechanics of solid bodies.
Repository Link: https://github.com/adtzlr/felupe
Version submitted:
v9.0.0v9.1.0 (updated on 2024-11-23)EiC: @cmarmo
Editor: @tkoyama010
Reviewer 1: @nicoguaro
Reviewer 2: TBD
Archive: TBD
JOSS DOI: TBD
Version accepted: TBD
Date accepted (month/day/year): TBD
Code of Conduct & Commitment to Maintain Package
Description
FElupe is a Python finite element analysis package focusing on the formulation and numerical solution of nonlinear problems in continuum mechanics of solid bodies. Easy-to-learn classes are provided to simulate the nonlinear deformation of hyperelastic solid bodies, see Getting Started. The constitutive material formulation of a hyperelastic solid body may be defined by its strain energy density function only (gradient and hessian are carried out by optional automatic differentiation). Strain energy functions for selected hyperelastic models are included. FElupe has only few dependencies, is a pure Python package but is also efficient enough for rubber-like structures. Several extension packages exist, e.g. to use a different automatic differentation backend or an interactive plot window.
Scope
Please indicate which category or categories.
Check out our package scope page to learn more about our
scope. (If you are unsure of which category you fit, we suggest you make a pre-submission inquiry):
Domain Specific
Community Partnerships
If your package is associated with an
existing community please check below:
For all submissions, explain how and why the package falls under the categories you indicated above. In your explanation, please address the following points (briefly, 1-2 sentences for each):
FElupe is great for teaching, scientific research as well as for mid-sized industry-problems related to the deformation of solid bodies. It has already been used in scientific articles which are listed in the README.
Yes, there is scikit-fem, FEniCS, GetFEM and probably some others. While scikit-fem is definitely lightweight and easy-to-install, I found out that it is typically too slow for running hyperelastic simulations, e.g. the deformation of a rubber-like solid (see also my initial questions / posts in kinnala/scikit-fem#616). FEniCS on the other hand has a great community but the install-entry-barrier is much higher compared to a pure PyPI Python package. The same also applies for GetFEM, because both projects provide Python packages for their compiled code. I was looking for a more lightweight Python package but also efficient enough for simulating typical rubber-like structures. Hence, I started working on FElupe in 2021.
Instead of assembling general weak forms like scikit-fem and FEniCS, FElupe follows a more Abaqus-like UMAT (user material) approach for constitutive material formulations of solid bodies, see e.g. ConstitutiveMaterial or Hyperelastic.
@tag
the editor you contacted:#211
Technical checks
For details about the pyOpenSci packaging requirements, see our packaging guide. Confirm each of the following by checking the box. This package:
Publication Options
JOSS Checks
paper.md
matching JOSS's requirements with a high-level description in the package root or ininst/
.Note: Will be added soon - not present in the submitted v9.0.0.Edit: Added in v9.1.0 atpaper/paper.md
, a compiled PDF version of the draft is available here.Note: JOSS accepts our review as theirs. You will NOT need to go through another full review. JOSS will only review your paper.md file. Be sure to link to this pyOpenSci issue when a JOSS issue is opened for your package. Also be sure to tell the JOSS editor that this is a pyOpenSci reviewed package once you reach this step.
Are you OK with Reviewers Submitting Issues and/or pull requests to your Repo Directly?
This option will allow reviewers to open smaller issues that can then be linked to PR's rather than submitting a more dense text based review. It will also allow you to demonstrate addressing the issue via PR links.
Confirm each of the following by checking the box.
Please fill out our survey
submission and improve our peer review process. We will also ask our reviewers
and editors to fill this out.
P.S. Have feedback/comments about our review process? Leave a comment here
Editor and Review Templates
The editor template can be found here.
The review template can be found here.
Footnotes
Please fill out a pre-submission inquiry before submitting a data visualization package. ↩
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: