=== Step B: side-by-side dome solver compare (site=baseline (typical CONUS)) ===

Loading midsurface mesh ...
  building corner network (70 panels, dedup_tol=300.0 mm)...
    89 unique mid-plane corners (3.15 panels per corner).
  subdivision depth = 3 (mean edge 973 mm; target 200.0 mm; 4^d sub-triangles per base triangle)
  mid-surface mesh built: 4639 nodes, 8960 triangles (128 per panel).
  boundary nodes (y < 200 mm): 338
  wrote VTU -> reports/full_dome_midsurface.vtu
  4639 nodes, 8960 triangles, 70 panels, 338 boundary nodes
  911 joint (multi-panel) nodes (19.6% of mesh)
  Material: E=70.8 MPa, nu=0.3, t=76.2 mm
  Load: wind_cc_peak p = -3831 Pa (p_outward = 0.00383 MPa)

Solving in-house CST+DKT ...
  done in 5.8 s
  in-house DKT         u_max= 29.469 mm   sigma_b_max= 0.6450 MPa   sigma_m_max= 0.8087   VM_max= 2.2597

Solving OpenSees ShellDKGT ...
  done in 1.5 s (OpenSees analyze() returned 0 (converged) using element type 'ShellDKGT'; n_nodes=4639, n_tri=8960)
  OpenSees ShellDKGT   u_max= 52.420 mm   sigma_b_max= 1.7450 MPa   sigma_m_max= 1.1792   VM_max= 3.0070

Aggregate ratios:
  u_max  ratio (OpenSees / in-house)        = 1.779
  sigma_b_max ratio (OpenSees / in-house)   = 2.705
  sigma_m_max ratio (OpenSees / in-house)   = 1.458
  VM_max ratio (OpenSees / in-house)        = 1.331

  Per-node disagreement classification (OpenSees vs in-house):
    class       count    median |Δu| mm    p95 |Δu| mm    median frac   p95 frac   max frac
    boundary      338            0.0000         0.0000          0.000      0.000      0.000
    joint         911            3.2168         9.2181          0.264      0.555      1.027
    interior     3390            3.3796        10.4154          0.285      0.775      8.426

  Top-10 nodes by |Δu| (mm):
       nid class        |u_inh|   |u_ops|     |Δu|    frac   xyz_mm
      4314 interior      12.132    41.493   30.062   2.478   ( -582.0,  1071.5, -1987.0)
      4305 interior      11.054    40.066   29.530   2.671   ( -569.6,   958.0, -1912.5)
      4290 interior      13.264    41.149   28.760   2.168   ( -594.4,  1184.9, -2061.6)
        70 interior      26.201    51.739   28.446   1.086   (    2.3,  2010.5, -2245.5)
      4208 interior      26.777    52.420   28.304   1.057   (  -90.4,  2030.5, -2228.0)
      4311 interior      10.041    37.133   27.464   2.735   ( -557.2,   844.5, -1837.9)
      4199 interior      27.145    52.170   27.409   1.010   ( -183.0,  2050.5, -2210.6)
      4206 interior      26.484    50.725   26.781   1.011   (    2.7,  2050.3, -2210.8)
      4201 interior      27.025    51.391   26.697   0.988   (  -89.9,  2070.3, -2193.3)
      4207 interior      25.811    49.248   26.142   1.013   (   95.4,  2030.2, -2228.2)

  Aggregate: nodes with frac < 5% = 346/4639 (7.5%)
             nodes with frac < 10% = 409/4639 (8.8%)

  Diagnostic interpretation of Step B:
    median frac disagreement -- boundary=0.000  joint=0.264  interior=0.285
    -> diffuse: similar disagreement on joint and interior -- suggests ELEMENT FORMULATION difference (not localized).