dumux merge requests
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests
2023-10-27T18:39:04Z
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3679
Cleanup/seperate parameter group for DNM
2023-10-27T18:39:04Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Cleanup/seperate parameter group for DNM
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Two new parameter groups are introduced "FouriersLaw" and "DualNetwork" to not put all parameters in "Problem" parameter group.
See [thread](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3677#note_93459) in merge request !3677
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
3.8
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3671
[dualnetwork] Rename Parameter "GrainFouriersLaw.UseAdaptedVolumeForPyramid" ...
2023-10-25T15:05:09Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[dualnetwork] Rename Parameter "GrainFouriersLaw.UseAdaptedVolumeForPyramid" to "GrainFouriersLaw.UseVolumeEqualPyramid"
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Fixes #1305
<!--
Is there a corresponding issue? Add "Fixes hashtag issuenumber" which will automatically close the issue when this MR is merged. Add "Related to hashtag issuenumber" if it's related but doesn't fix the issue completely.
-->
**Notes for the reviewer**
TODO: insert text here
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
Closes #1305
3.8
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3663
[PNM][util] add poreExtendedRadius to dgf-file
2023-10-24T06:49:42Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[PNM][util] add poreExtendedRadius to dgf-file
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Fixes #1254
<!--
Is there a corresponding issue? Add "Fixes hashtag issue number" which will automatically close the issue when this MR is merged. Add "Related to hashtag issue number" if it's related but doesn't fix the issue completely.
-->
**Notes for the reviewer**
Before there was only one radius written into `.dgf`-files which was `PoreInscribedRadius`, but inside the script saved under the name `pore.radius`. For `pore.radius` the extended pore radius of the network was assigned.
Now, we distinguish between the inscribed and the extended radius. The `PoreInscribedRadius`/`pore.inscribedRadius` and `PoreExtendedRadius`/`pore.extendedRadius` is now obtained from the inscribed and extended radius of the network. If the inscribed radius is not part of the parameters of the network, the extended radius of the network will be assigned to `pore.inscribedRadius` as it was done before.
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [ ] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [ ] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3638
[md][dualnetwork][couplingmanager] use templates, add comments, use DimLessNu...
2023-09-04T14:59:57Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[md][dualnetwork][couplingmanager] use templates, add comments, use DimLessNumbers
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does**:
This MR should cleanup the couplingmanager for the dual network a little bit. Before, there were a lot of functions duplicated just with other domain indices (one function for void domain and one for solid domain). Now templates are used and those functions for each domain are merged.
At the same time, I used the DimensionLessNumbers from Dumux to calculate the reynolds number. This include is quite nice as other dimensionless numbers such as Prandtl or upscaled Nusselt number can be also calculated with this at a later stage. However, it can be argued if this include is necessary. I think it's nice to use, what was already implemented before.
As well a few comments have been added.
There is now corresponding issue open.
**Notes for the reviewer**
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3619
Draft: An example for two-phase flow properties using pore network
2023-10-30T09:29:04Z
Maziar Veyskarami
Draft: An example for two-phase flow properties using pore network
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Since many people use pore network for upscaling purposes, there is a need to have a well-designed and documented example of how it can be done using the pore network in DUMUX. Although we already have an example for upscaling of a single-phase flow system, having another example for upscaling of a two-phase system to obtain capillary-saturation and relative permeability-saturation curves is desirable.
Fixes #1258
**Notes for the reviewer**
TODO: insert text here
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [ ] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [ ] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [ ] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [ ] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [ ] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [ ] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
- [ ] (if not applicable remove) are newly introduced or modified physical values/functions backed up with a scientific reference (including doi) in the docs?
- [ ] (if not applicable remove) if the examples are modified, is the documentation regenerated (using [`generate_example_docs.py`](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/examples/generate_example_docs.py))
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3565
Resolve "[PNM][util] Check for versions of porespy and openpnm in python scri...
2023-07-26T21:36:22Z
Hanchuan Wu
Resolve "[PNM][util] Check for versions of porespy and openpnm in python scripts + updating scripts to new versions"
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please...
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
fixes #1243
<!--
Is there a corresponding issue? Add "Fixes hashtag issuenumber" which will automatically close the issue when this MR is merged. Add "Related to hashtag issuenumber" if it's related but doesn't fix the issue completely.
-->
**Notes for the reviewer**
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
* [ ] CI fails because code was not linted (black pylint)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
Closes #1243
3.8
Hanchuan Wu
Hanchuan Wu
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3426
Add dualnetwork test from dumux-pub repository Koch2021a
2023-05-22T06:19:57Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Add dualnetwork test from dumux-pub repository Koch2021a
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
This adds the possibility to s...
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
This adds the possibility to study the heat transfer between one fluid phase and a solid phase with one porenetwork model for the void space coupled to one network model for the solid phase (dualnetwork)
In addition one test case is provided with reference solutions
<!--
Is there a corresponding issue? Add "Fixes hashtag issuenumber" which will automatically close the issue when this MR is merged. Add "Related to hashtag issuenumber" if it's related but doesn't fix the issue completely.
-->
**Notes for the reviewer**
Files and test case, where taken from [https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-pub/Koch2021a](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-pub/Koch2021a) and modified, such that it is runs on the current master
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
- [x] (if not applicable remove) are newly introduced or modified physical values/functions backed up with a scientific reference (including doi) in the docs?
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
3.8
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3268
[pnm] Disable blocking non-wetting fluid flow out by default
2022-09-07T08:54:25Z
Hanchuan Wu
[pnm] Disable blocking non-wetting fluid flow out by default
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Pore-network model will no lon...
<!--
Thanks for considering to open a merge request!
Before asking for a review of your MR, please read the [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
Pore-network model will no longer prevent non-wetting fluid flowing out by default. Throats blocking non-wetting fluid can be specified by setting runtime parameter `InvasionState.BlockNonwettingPhaseAtThroatLabel`.
<!--
Keep the following TODO list in the merge request description for documentation.
Bullet points marked with _(if not applicable remove)_ may be removed.
-->
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
<!--
The following aspects might also come up during review:
* Does the change reduce the performance of the code (more CPU time or more memory) and is this justified by the benefits
* Does the change improve the performance? (if yes, add this aspect to the MR description)
* Is the code is a gross violation of programming best practices such as DRY (don't repeat yourself / code duplication, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%E2%80%99t_repeat_yourself, the SOLID principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID), or the C++ Core Guidelines (https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines)?
* Is the code well-documented, concise, easily readable? (e.g. variables are well-named, the logic is split into small & well-named functions)
-->
3.6
Hanchuan Wu
Hanchuan Wu
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3220
[pnm][util] Fix missing new line in openpnm2dgf's dgf writer
2022-07-27T19:00:36Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
[pnm][util] Fix missing new line in openpnm2dgf's dgf writer
The newline was missing so everything was written in one line which leads to a wrong dgf file.
This should be backported to 3.5 after merging.
The newline was missing so everything was written in one line which leads to a wrong dgf file.
This should be backported to 3.5 after merging.
3.6
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3018
[pnm][fluxcache] Improve readability
2022-02-10T16:36:04Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
[pnm][fluxcache] Improve readability
Remove warning, this consistency check makes always sense. I don't think we need to issue a warning here.
Remove warning, this consistency check makes always sense. I don't think we need to issue a warning here.
3.5
Hanchuan Wu
Hanchuan Wu
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3009
Fix pc-snap-off in pore network to use the proper corner half angle
2022-09-08T18:49:58Z
Maziar Veyskarami
Fix pc-snap-off in pore network to use the proper corner half angle
Snap-off happens in throats which have corners. To calculate the pc-snap-off, corner half angle of the throat is needed. Current implementation is only based on square cross section. We need to include corner half angle in the calculatio...
Snap-off happens in throats which have corners. To calculate the pc-snap-off, corner half angle of the throat is needed. Current implementation is only based on square cross section. We need to include corner half angle in the calculation to be able to calculate pc snap-off for other cross sections than square.
Before you request a review from someone, make sure to revise the following points:
- [x] does the new code follow the [style guide](doc/styleguide.md)?
- [x] do the test pipelines pass? (see guide on [how to run pipelines for a merge request](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/wikis/Running-test-pipelines-for-merge-requests))
- [x] is the code you changed and/or the new code you wrote covered in the test suite? (if not, extend the existing tests or write new ones)
- [x] does your change affect public interfaces or behavior, or, does it introduce a new feature? If so, document the change in `CHANGELOG.md`.
- [x] is the list of the header includes complete? ("include what you use")
- [x] all files have to end with a `\n` character. Make sure there is no `\ No newline at end of file` comment in "Changes" of this MR.
- [x] (if not applicable remove) are newly introduced or modified physical values/functions backed up with a scientific reference (including doi) in the docs?
3.6
Maziar Veyskarami
Maziar Veyskarami
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2996
Improve PNM grid creator
2022-04-05T09:11:16Z
Kilian Weishaupt
Improve PNM grid creator
3.5
Hanchuan Wu
Hanchuan Wu
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2869
Fix BoundaryFlux class in pore network
2021-11-18T07:39:23Z
Maziar Veyskarami
Fix BoundaryFlux class in pore network
Fix BoundaryFlux class in boundaryflux.hh to work with Neumann boundary condition ad requested in issue #996.
Fixes #996.
Fix BoundaryFlux class in boundaryflux.hh to work with Neumann boundary condition ad requested in issue #996.
Fixes #996.
3.5
Kilian Weishaupt
Kilian Weishaupt
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2800
[pnm] Improve parameter handling for Grid.NumPores and use same type
2021-08-26T16:15:26Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
[pnm] Improve parameter handling for Grid.NumPores and use same type
3.5