dumux merge requestshttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests2022-03-28T09:14:46Zhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2433WIP: Feature/new staggered higher order2022-03-28T09:14:46ZNed ColtmanWIP: Feature/new staggered higher ordertodos:
- [x] Sincos higher order test stationary (pass)
- [x] Sincos higher order test instationary (fail)
- [x] 3D Channel higher order test (pass)
- [x] Kovaznay higher order test stationary (fail)
- [ ] Find errors that would cause ba...todos:
- [x] Sincos higher order test stationary (pass)
- [x] Sincos higher order test instationary (fail)
- [x] 3D Channel higher order test (pass)
- [x] Kovaznay higher order test stationary (fail)
- [ ] Find errors that would cause bad convergence and solution differencesNed ColtmanNed Coltmanhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2930WIP: New Staggered Rans (TwoEq)2022-03-28T09:06:24ZNed ColtmanWIP: New Staggered Rans (TwoEq)fixes #807
fixes #538
fixes #951
closes !1248 (becomes obsolete)
Todos (Updated):
- [ ] For the SST Model, update the Finner, Fouter interface and remove from volvars.
- [ ] Introduce more meaningful boundary conditions, includin...fixes #807
fixes #538
fixes #951
closes !1248 (becomes obsolete)
Todos (Updated):
- [ ] For the SST Model, update the Finner, Fouter interface and remove from volvars.
- [ ] Introduce more meaningful boundary conditions, including tke and dissipation constraints
- [ ] Update spatial params to fit to !2888 with !2984
- [ ] Make runtime call an enum
- [ ] Figure out any circular dependencies between the two problems
Next MRs:
- [ ] Introduce the Kepsilon model(s) again
- [ ] Introduce the Compositional models (Separate MR)
- [ ] Introduce the Zeroeq and oneeq models (Separate MR)3.6Ned ColtmanNed Coltmanhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/1248[WIP] Feature/improve rans2022-03-20T21:07:51ZKilian Weishaupt[WIP] Feature/improve ranshttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3024Draft: Do not merge: Temp/poromech storagederivs hacky fix2022-02-28T13:23:39ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noDraft: Do not merge: Temp/poromech storagederivs hacky fixhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2572[WIP] Feature/dumux solution vector2022-02-25T12:25:33ZKilian Weishaupt[WIP] Feature/dumux solution vector__TODO__:
- [ ] decide whether this is the way to go (maybe do some performance testing)
- [ ] specify interface
- [ ] make sure the `Assembler` or `NewtonSolver` already get the `native()` object (in context of residuals__TODO__:
- [ ] decide whether this is the way to go (maybe do some performance testing)
- [ ] specify interface
- [ ] make sure the `Assembler` or `NewtonSolver` already get the `native()` object (in context of residualshttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/3028Draft: Fix/pnm-ff interface velocity2022-02-23T11:37:38ZMaziar VeyskaramiDraft: Fix/pnm-ff interface velocityRelated to issue: #1132Related to issue: #1132Maziar VeyskaramiMaziar Veyskaramihttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2730Draft: Advection Diffusion Model2022-02-22T15:00:44ZNed ColtmanDraft: Advection Diffusion ModelI'm not sure if this is something we would really want, but I set it up for a different module and mentioned this in issue #1001.
This is the same as the tracer1p model with a stationary velocity field, but it does not assume that the ...I'm not sure if this is something we would really want, but I set it up for a different module and mentioned this in issue #1001.
This is the same as the tracer1p model with a stationary velocity field, but it does not assume that the domain is a porous medium. It should solve the transport equation decoupled from any momentum balance.
The test calculates a velocity field, passes this to a spatialParams, then calculates transport on the same domain with a fixed velocity field. To make it interesting, it's a rectangular domain with a circle cut out of the center.
This should produce the same result as the tracer1p model with the same velocity field and a porosity of 1.
If this is something we do want to include, It would likely benefit from a bit of refactoring.https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2849Cleanup/maxwell stefan use harmonicmean for tpfa2022-02-21T13:24:33ZKatharina HeckCleanup/maxwell stefan use harmonicmean for tpfa<!--
Thanks for sending a merge request!
If this is your first time, read our [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
This cleans up the Maxwell-Stefan tpfa diffusion law. Previou...<!--
Thanks for sending a merge request!
If this is your first time, read our [contributing guidelines](/CONTRIBUTING.md)
-->
**What this MR does / why does DuMux need it**:
This cleans up the Maxwell-Stefan tpfa diffusion law. Previously we used a version, where the tpfa calculation was harder to read and e.g. the calculation of the mole fraction gradient was not obvious but hidden in vector-matrix multiplications. This is not practical if we want to add more driving forces of diffusion.
<!--
**Which issue this MR fixes** *(optional - uncomment and add issue)*:
fixes #
-->
Todo:
- [x] use branchingFacetX or remove it --> removed as there is currently no test for maxwellstefan and network grids
- [x] add this for staggered grid implementation
- [x] add this for the stokes-darcy coupling dataBernd FlemischBernd Flemischhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/1821[WIP][md] Implement box staggered coupling2022-02-01T16:25:01ZKilian Weishaupt[WIP][md] Implement box staggered couplingTodos:
- [x] Add test for segment-segment intersection algorithm
- [x] Make segment-segment intersection algorithm more efficient
- [x] Put segment-segment in different MR
- [x] Extract Box-Forchheimer to separate MR
- [x] New BJ test ...Todos:
- [x] Add test for segment-segment intersection algorithm
- [x] Make segment-segment intersection algorithm more efficient
- [x] Put segment-segment in different MR
- [x] Extract Box-Forchheimer to separate MR
- [x] New BJ test (existing test uses indefinite perm. matrix)
- [x] Change convergence script to specify convergence rate
- [ ] It currently only works for `DiffusionCoefficientAveragingType::ffOnly`
- [ ] Maxwell Stefan Diffusion law not yet implemented when using Box
- [ ] Renaming: Use ff/pm instead of stokes/darcy
- [ ] New IC assume specific parameter group "Darcy", generalise this
- [ ] Add missing tests
Suggestions:
- [x] Currently, we retrieve the entire context via `couplingContextVector()`, but the old interface is still there. I would shrink this to only one interface and probably rename it. Currently, there is one context object per coupling segment, so maybe we can find a better name.
- [x] At the moment the coupling segment geometry is stored in both the darcy and the stokes coupling info objects in the mapper. I don't think this is the most memory consuming part of the code, but there is room for memory efficiency improvements.
Fixes #788.Dennis GläserDennis Gläserhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2294WIP: Add Trilinos solvers2022-01-19T11:22:38ZBernd FlemischWIP: Add Trilinos solversAdd an optional dependency to Trilinos, https://github.com/trilinos/trilinos. Implement a linear solver backend that uses a solver from there.Add an optional dependency to Trilinos, https://github.com/trilinos/trilinos. Implement a linear solver backend that uses a solver from there.https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2494WIP Test/nonisothermal2021-11-24T10:29:34ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP Test/nonisothermalSee !2473. Based on !2471
Shows unphysical temperature gradient.
![Screenshot_2021-03-02_at_14.00.47](/uploads/97d41ded8307b900fa2ea99a54400903/Screenshot_2021-03-02_at_14.00.47.png)
* [x] See if we can get a better solution by addin...See !2473. Based on !2471
Shows unphysical temperature gradient.
![Screenshot_2021-03-02_at_14.00.47](/uploads/97d41ded8307b900fa2ea99a54400903/Screenshot_2021-03-02_at_14.00.47.png)
* [x] See if we can get a better solution by adding $`\vec{v}\cdot\nabla p`$ in the energy balance somehow
For incompressible fluids we have at least two options:
* Assemble internal energy fluxes instead of enthalpy fluxes, the volume work term disappears (not generic)
* Add the missing term and keep assembling enthalpy fluxes
There might be other solution by inserting the continuity equation to turn the term into some time derivative.https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2925Draft: [fcstaggetred] Higher order rebase2021-11-05T14:45:50ZKilian WeishauptDraft: [fcstaggetred] Higher order rebase* fix up allocation sizes and max per elements
* add neighbor element indexes to each scv
* differentiate between neighbor and parallel scvs* fix up allocation sizes and max per elements
* add neighbor element indexes to each scv
* differentiate between neighbor and parallel scvshttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2887WIP: Feature/multithreaded assembly multidomain2021-10-19T16:02:12ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP: Feature/multithreaded assembly multidomainThis is only a placeholder so far. I think the coloring logic has to be delegated to the coupling manager in the multidomain case because only the coupling manager will know what stuff is accessed (especially context-related) and therefo...This is only a placeholder so far. I think the coloring logic has to be delegated to the coupling manager in the multidomain case because only the coupling manager will know what stuff is accessed (especially context-related) and therefore determine which elements cannot be in the same batch.https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2875WIP [md][ff-pm] Cleanups2021-10-19T13:07:37ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP [md][ff-pm] CleanupsSome smaller fixes to be addressed after !2826 is merged.
* [ ] Implement varying beta
* [ ] Make zero-tangential-velocity one of the options for fixed pressure (enum?)Some smaller fixes to be addressed after !2826 is merged.
* [ ] Implement varying beta
* [ ] Make zero-tangential-velocity one of the options for fixed pressure (enum?)https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2203WIP: [test] Add Karman vortex street application2021-10-19T07:59:06ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP: [test] Add Karman vortex street applicationRuns way too long to be a good test. Maybe also a good test case for solvers though. And looks fairly cool
![vortexstreet-small](/uploads/9bf4bcf66398ba24bbaccb32d17a00b2/vortexstreet-small.gif)
Update: I got a big speedup by using...Runs way too long to be a good test. Maybe also a good test case for solvers though. And looks fairly cool
![vortexstreet-small](/uploads/9bf4bcf66398ba24bbaccb32d17a00b2/vortexstreet-small.gif)
Update: I got a big speedup by using the SIMPLE-preconditioned BiCGSTABSolver of !1989 https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2805Draft: [ci] put pl status job in separate yml file2021-09-28T14:47:54ZDennis GläserDraft: [ci] put pl status job in separate yml filehttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2835Draft: [ci] use matrix for different setups2021-09-28T14:39:31ZDennis GläserDraft: [ci] use matrix for different setupshttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2811WIP Feature/p-foamgrid2021-08-31T12:45:02ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP Feature/p-foamgridhttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2292WIP: Feature/nonlinear schemes decomposition negative2021-08-24T10:33:28ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP: Feature/nonlinear schemes decomposition negativehttps://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/merge_requests/2628WIP [IMPES][test] Use analytical derivatives2021-05-20T17:47:37ZTimo Kochtimokoch@math.uio.noWIP [IMPES][test] Use analytical derivativesThis test results now in the same solution than the
old IMPES implementation, at least when gravity is neglected.
Related to #869This test results now in the same solution than the
old IMPES implementation, at least when gravity is neglected.
Related to #869