Skip to content
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

An implementation of coupled bcs. #460

Draft
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cianwilson
Copy link
Member

This is currently just a draft PR! Please do not merge.

I think this initial implementation can actually be reimplemented in a considerably simpler way but I would like to add a test to this version first.

This may break current tests as it changes the default boundary condition logic (it is no longer possible to just set the bc type based on what it is not because there are more than two types of bc now).

Think this can actually be reimplemented in a considerably simpler way but I would like to add a test to this version first.

This may break current tests as it changes the default boundary condition logic (it is no longer possible to just set the bc type
based on what it is not because there are more than two types of bc now).
This allows generic scalar fields to be output which have a length of at least 5 (not just 4).
This may break tests that rely on the old defaults.
This just runs for 2 timesteps and checks that the shell slices produced match the expected values on 2 coupled fields (1
temperature, 1 chi, both coupled to another chi).
Real*8 :: dTdr_chi_coeff_bottom(1:n_scalar_max) = 0.0d0
Real*8 :: dTdr_dchidr_coeff_bottom(1:n_scalar_max) = 0.0d0
Real*8 :: dTdr_T_coeff_bottom = 0.0d0

Real*8 :: chi_a_Bottom(1:n_scalar_max) = 1.0d0
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

missed this

@cianwilson
Copy link
Member Author

Need to set this up to restore the old defaults if no other bc is set

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant