dumux issues
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues
2018-07-20T15:22:00Z
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/496
Confusing phase numbering
2018-07-20T15:22:00Z
Thomas Fetzer
Confusing phase numbering
In e.g. the 2p2c model, the phase numbering is a bit confusing. The formulation allows for p0s1 or p1s0, but the setState() function for the priVars allows firstPhaseOnly and secondPhaseOnly. In addition, it should be checked, if the pri...
In e.g. the 2p2c model, the phase numbering is a bit confusing. The formulation allows for p0s1 or p1s0, but the setState() function for the priVars allows firstPhaseOnly and secondPhaseOnly. In addition, it should be checked, if the privarsswitchnewton could print the phase's names instead of something like "First phase dissapears .... s0 < 0".
3.0
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/453
Introduce SolidSystem and SolidComponents
2018-05-08T16:07:40Z
Kilian Weishaupt
Introduce SolidSystem and SolidComponents
The SolidSystem calculates quantities like solidHeatCapacity, solidDensity and solidHeatConductivity based on the compositions
of individual solid components such as `Granite` or `Sand`.
The concept uses the components' volume fractio...
The SolidSystem calculates quantities like solidHeatCapacity, solidDensity and solidHeatConductivity based on the compositions
of individual solid components such as `Granite` or `Sand`.
The concept uses the components' volume fractions which are either solution dependent or fixed via the `spatialParameters`.
For simple cases, where there is only __one__ non-reactive solid component, the base spatialParams implement a `volumeFractions()` method that calls the `spatialParams` implementation's `porosity()` method and returns 1-porosity.
For other cases, this method throws an error and therefore forces the user to implement an own `volumeFaction()` in the `spatialParams`.
The solidSystem has an interface function `porosity()` depending on the solid composition, i.e. a `SolidState`.
This may be realized using some template meta programing magic.
Related to #452 #433 #450, fixes #409.
3.0
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/493
Unify PorousMediumVolVars and FreeFlowVolVars
2018-07-20T15:19:50Z
Kilian Weishaupt
Unify PorousMediumVolVars and FreeFlowVolVars
After having introduced the solid system, both PM flow and free flow should be able to use the same base volVars
After having introduced the solid system, both PM flow and free flow should be able to use the same base volVars
3.0
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1095
Pore network model needs dune-foamgrid to work
2021-11-02T17:17:19Z
Maziar Veyskarami
Pore network model needs dune-foamgrid to work
Add dune-foamgrid to the dune-module list which needs to be installed in the [Dumux webpage](https://dumux.org/installation/) or mention it separately that to use pore network model you need to install dune-foamgrid.
Add dune-foamgrid to the dune-module list which needs to be installed in the [Dumux webpage](https://dumux.org/installation/) or mention it separately that to use pore network model you need to install dune-foamgrid.
3.5
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1165
Separate extended 1.5phase Richards model into a separate model
2022-10-05T07:59:44Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
Separate extended 1.5phase Richards model into a separate model
The option enableDiffusionInGasPhase appears in many places and makes the standard Richards model hard to read.
Per default we also use SwitchablePrimaryVariables which are only needed for the extended Richards model.
I propose to separ...
The option enableDiffusionInGasPhase appears in many places and makes the standard Richards model hard to read.
Per default we also use SwitchablePrimaryVariables which are only needed for the extended Richards model.
I propose to separate this into two models. In order to make Richards tests pass that set the phase state we need a deprecation period.
3.6
Sina Ackermann
Sina Ackermann
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1172
2pnc computes densities twice
2022-07-12T19:25:45Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
2pnc computes densities twice
2pnc (maybe also 2p2c, 3p3c) computes the densities again after they have been computed in the constraint solver.
This seems like unnecessary overhead.
2pnc (maybe also 2p2c, 3p3c) computes the densities again after they have been computed in the constraint solver.
This seems like unnecessary overhead.
3.6
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1300
[porousmediumflow][2pnc][volvars] Correct comment for dynamic viscosity
2023-09-27T18:01:14Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[porousmediumflow][2pnc][volvars] Correct comment for dynamic viscosity
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
This form is for bug reports ONLY!
If you're looking for help check out the [readme](/README....
<!--
SPDX-FileCopyrightInfo: Copyright © DuMux Project contributors, see AUTHORS.md in root folder
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0
-->
<!--
This form is for bug reports ONLY!
If you're looking for help check out the [readme](/README.md).
-->
**Bug report**
@Simon Grether pointed out, that in [/dumux/porousmediumflow/2pnc/volumevariables.hh](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/dumux/porousmediumflow/2pnc/volumevariables.hh?ref_type=heads#L353) the comment for the viscosity says kinematic viscosity, but it's actually the **dynamic** viscosity.
This should be changed to avoid confusion.
3.8
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/371
Mismatch between 2p2c and 2pnc
2017-12-22T13:12:06Z
Thomas Fetzer
Mismatch between 2p2c and 2pnc
I checked whether the 2p2c and 2pnc formulation produce the same results for a 2c system. This is not the case. The mismatch is quite significant, see the values below. Maybe I did something wrong, but I fear they do different things, se...
I checked whether the 2p2c and 2pnc formulation produce the same results for a 2c system. This is not the case. The mismatch is quite significant, see the values below. Maybe I did something wrong, but I fear they do different things, see e.g. #370 and branch 'fix/assimilation-of-2p2c-2pnc'
Data differs in parameter: Sn
Difference is too large: 60.04% -> between: 0.000251348 and 0.000629042
Info for Sn: max_abs_parameter_value=0.185001 and min_abs_parameter_value=0.0.
Data differs in parameter: X_n^H2O
Difference is too large: 19.41% -> between: 0.00600807 and 0.00745481
Info for X_n^H2O: max_abs_parameter_value=0.0133691 and min_abs_parameter_value=0.000473928.
Data differs in parameter: rhoN
Difference is too large: 4.60% -> between: 72.2149 and 75.6937
Info for rhoN: max_abs_parameter_value=107.177 and min_abs_parameter_value=54.9932.
Data differs in parameter: temperature
Difference is too large: 1.61% -> between: 370.613 and 376.667
Info for temperature: max_abs_parameter_value=380.006 and min_abs_parameter_value=311.8.
Bernd Flemisch
Bernd Flemisch
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/370
Use of effictive diffusivity in all models?
2017-12-22T13:12:06Z
Thomas Fetzer
Use of effictive diffusivity in all models?
I realized that some models, e.g. the 2pnc... do not use an effective diffusivity model, but a hard-coded one. Maybe this is made on purpose, but I guess it is not what we want.
I realized that some models, e.g. the 2pnc... do not use an effective diffusivity model, but a hard-coded one. Maybe this is made on purpose, but I guess it is not what we want.
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/115
FS#115 richards box model seems to be broken
2012-01-09T15:16:18Z
FS
FS#115 richards box model seems to be broken
# Metadata
| Property | Value |
| -------- | ----- |
| Project | dumux |
| Category | Richards |
| Reported by | Andreas Lauser (andreas.lauser@iws.uni-stuttgart.de) |
| Reported at | Jan 4, 2012 16:44 |
| Type | Bug Report |
| ...
# Metadata
| Property | Value |
| -------- | ----- |
| Project | dumux |
| Category | Richards |
| Reported by | Andreas Lauser (andreas.lauser@iws.uni-stuttgart.de) |
| Reported at | Jan 4, 2012 16:44 |
| Type | Bug Report |
| Version | Git |
| Last edited by | Bernd Flemisch (bernd@iws.uni-stuttgart.de) |
| Last edited at | Jan 9, 2012 15:16 |
| Closed by | Bernd Flemisch (bernd@iws.uni-stuttgart.de) |
| Closed at | Jan 9, 2012 15:16 |
| Closed in version | 2.1 |
| Resolution | Fixed |
# Description
it shows very bad convergence behavior and the injected liquid has a bias to the left even though there are no pressure gradients.
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/480
[volumevariables] order of updates does not work when using compositional sol...
2018-04-25T22:00:09Z
Katharina Heck
[volumevariables] order of updates does not work when using compositional solidstate and mineralization
Currently the mineralization volumevariables set the volume fraction of the solid components last, after everything else is updated. This causes an issue, when we have e.g. a solid density dependent on composition of the solid components...
Currently the mineralization volumevariables set the volume fraction of the solid components last, after everything else is updated. This causes an issue, when we have e.g. a solid density dependent on composition of the solid components.The solid density is already set in the solid state in the non-isothermal volumevariables, before the actual solid composition is updated. Currently a workaround is to not set the solid density in the solid state but to calculate it every time.
It would make sense to think about a better order in the volumevariables.
todo
* [ ] Use constant component as default solid comp
* [ ] Introduce addtitional volvar class that extracts the solid volume fractions (specialized for solidsystem traits)
this is related to: #453
Katharina Heck
Katharina Heck
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1356
[test][porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Neumann flux at top has to b...
2024-02-16T08:57:42Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[test][porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Neumann flux at top has to be adapted
Within in the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) a few things for the Neumann BC at the top should be adapted:...
Within in the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) a few things for the Neumann BC at the top should be adapted:
1. In the upwind term ([here](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads#L239)) the reference mass-specific density of air is used, but there should be the molar density of air.
With the mass-specific density $\rho = 1.2 ~\text{kg}/\text{m}^3$ and the molar mass of air $M=28.96 * 10^{-3} ~\text{kg}/\text{mol}$, we have $\rho^{\text{mol}}=\rho/M \approx 41,44 ~\text{mol}/\text{m}^3$
2. The density of air (e.g. [here](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads#L231)) for the liquid flux should generally be harmonic averaged if CCFV is used with TPFA and arithmetic averaged for box method (as flux for liquid phase is purely diffusive and we do upwind just for advective processes)
3. The comments for "gas flux in/out" ([here](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads#L246)) should be switched.
4. For the energy exchange the harmonic mean of the effective heat conductivity within the porous medium and the heat conductivity within the free-flow should be taken. (Note, that applying the same harmonic averaging for the diffusion coefficient is counter-productive as the effective diffusion coefficient, using Millington-Quirk, is small for highly water-saturated porous media. This would lead to a lower evaporation rate for highly water saturated porous-media in comparison to high evaporation rates for almost dried-out porous media. Hence, only the pure binary diffusion coefficient is taken - It could be scaled e.g. linearly with the porosity)
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1325
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Use current permeability for Neuma...
2024-01-10T08:34:05Z
Simon Grether
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Use current permeability for Neumann gas flux
In the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) the reference permeability is used in the [problem](https://git.iws....
In the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) the reference permeability is used in the [problem](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads) for calculating the Neumann flux of the component air. However, the permeability changes during the simulation due to the precipitation of salt.
Therefore, I propose to use the current permeability here:
`...`
`*volVars.permeability()`
`...`
`*volVars.permeability()`
`...`
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1324
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Use mass fractions for diffusive N...
2023-12-13T14:15:55Z
Simon Grether
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin][nonisothermal] Use mass fractions for diffusive Neumann flux
In the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) the mole fraction is used in the [problem](https://git.iws.uni-stutt...
In the [non-isothermal 2pncmin test](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/tree/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal?ref_type=heads) the mole fraction is used in the [problem](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads) for calculating the diffusive Neumann flux of the evaporation rate. However, when using a mass-averaged reference system, the mass fraction should be used for the difference quotient of diffusive fluxes.
Therefore, I propose the following correction:
`static const Scalar massFracRefH2O = getParam("FreeFlow.RefMassFracH2O");`
`...`
`const Scalar massFracH2OInside = volVars.massFraction(gasPhaseIdx, H2OIdx);`
`...`
`if (massFracH2OInside - massFracRefH2O > 0)`
`...`
`* (massFracH2OInside - massFracRefH2O)`
`...`
`* (massFracH2OInside - massFracRefH2O)`
`...`
Moreover, the reference value for the free-flow in the [input-file](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/params.input?ref_type=heads) should be converted into the mass fraction.
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/1301
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin] Use correct time step size for problem file
2023-12-11T14:53:06Z
Anna Mareike Kostelecky
[porousmediumflow][2pncmin] Use correct time step size for problem file
In the [2pncmin](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal) test the time step size is used in the [problem](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/du...
In the [2pncmin](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal) test the time step size is used in the [problem](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/problem.hh?ref_type=heads#L331) for calculating the amount of precipitating salt per time. For this the time step is set in the [main file](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/test/porousmediumflow/2pncmin/nonisothermal/main.cc?ref_type=heads#L140) at the beginning of each new time step. For this case this works so far.
However, @Simon Grether pointed out that for simulations where the [newton solver](https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/blob/master/dumux/nonlinear/newtonsolver.hh?ref_type=heads#L340) does not converge and hence reduces the time step, this is not correctly implemented. This modification of the time step is not accounted for in the problem file, when just setting the time step once in the time loop.
Hence this would be nice to adapt already in the 2pncmin test, such that if this test case is copied and gets modified there is one possible error source less.
3.9
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/981
Check Richards analytic derivatives
2021-05-05T21:32:44Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
Check Richards analytic derivatives
The new benchmark cases merged in !2432 do not convergence (failing Newton convergence) with the analytic Jacobian implementation. There is a test using the analytic Jacobian (Richards lens test) so most parts should be tested.
Possible...
The new benchmark cases merged in !2432 do not convergence (failing Newton convergence) with the analytic Jacobian implementation. There is a test using the analytic Jacobian (Richards lens test) so most parts should be tested.
Possible differences in the benchmark case: extrusion factor, ...?
https://git.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/dumux-repositories/dumux/-/issues/362
Need for Porousmediumflow/Freeflow/Porenetwork type tag
2018-04-18T12:43:26Z
Timo Koch
timokoch@math.uio.no
Need for Porousmediumflow/Freeflow/Porenetwork type tag
Many properties that are grouped under `Implicit` (especially many new ones on `next`) are only useful for porousmediumflow problem. Further they are not restricted to an implicit time discretization. We should introduce a `Porousmediumf...
Many properties that are grouped under `Implicit` (especially many new ones on `next`) are only useful for porousmediumflow problem. Further they are not restricted to an implicit time discretization. We should introduce a `Porousmediumflow` Typetag that porousmedium flow models derive from. Many of the properties introduces for each sub model are actually also shared by all/most porousmediumflow models.
The same holds for freeflow / porenetwork / geomechanics.
Related to this: Some implicit properties might actually be independent of the time discretization as well and could be moved to the base properties.
* [x] Porousmediumflow
* [ ] Porenetworkflow
* [x] Freeflow
* [ ] Geomechanics