-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 88
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
Numerical parameters #1150
Comments
Note that this may affect both model parameters and solver parameters as defined in #1210. |
Task: Map out "all" numerical constant which are potentially in use. Provide a new object (my suggestion would be to follow the naming style and use |
Work in progress of Overview of Potential Parameters classes PorePyBelow is a list of parameters that are less frequently used but could be valuable to incorporate into the class.
Suggestions from Eirik:
Candidates for contact mechanicsTodo Newton solverTodo Physical parameters variable_units = [
"Pa",
"Pa * m^2 * s^-1",
"m",
"m",
"K",
"m^-1 * s^-1 * J",
"m^-1 * s^-1 * J",
]
compare_scaled_primary_variables(setup_0, setup_1, variables, variable_units)
secondary_variables = ["darcy_flux", "fluid_flux", "stress", "porosity"]
secondary_units = ["Pa * m^2 * s^-1", "kg * m^-1 * s^-1", "Pa * m", "-"]
domain_dimensions = [None, None, 2, None]
compare_scaled_model_quantities(
setup_0, setup_1, secondary_variables, secondary_units, domain_dimensions
) params = {
"times_to_export": [], # Suppress output for tests
"fracture_indices": [0],
"cartesian": True,
"uy_north": -1e-5,
"material_constants": {"solid": solid, "fluid": fluid},
} Candidates for mesh arguments og gridsTodo
cell_size_args = ["cell_size", "cell_size_x", "cell_size_y", "cell_size_z"]
meshing_args: dict = {
"cell_size": 0.1,
"cell_size_x": 0.1,
"cell_size_y": 0.1,
"cell_size_z": 0.1,
} |
Initial tasks identified during discussion:
|
We might want to collect numerical parameters in some dedicated object, possibly of the
MaterialConstants
type. @keileg's comments copied from other discussion:Agree! I can think of a few reasons for revisiting this:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: