WIP: New way of evaluating drum material properties for thermal conduction#790
WIP: New way of evaluating drum material properties for thermal conduction#790YaqiWang wants to merge 1 commit intoidaholab:develfrom
Conversation
|
Note that we do not save much number of input lines wise here because there is only one drum in this model and only two segments on the drum. It does make users avoid the mind boggling math in the functions. But in a full core case, we will have 12 drums and this change can help. |
YaqiWang
force-pushed
the
drum_thermal_prop
branch
from
8698da7 to
0d88a73
Compare
YaqiWang
force-pushed
the
drum_thermal_prop
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e1a270c to
2b27c0b
Compare
|
@GiudGiud just to let you know that this is updated according to the merged change in MOOSE. |
| [drum_thermal_conductivity] | ||
| type = ControlDrumMaterial | ||
| block = '${drum_blocks}' | ||
| drum_material_property = thermal_conductivity |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now I am thinking that we could evaluate multiple properties and then segment_material_properties can be a 2D array. This will make us able to merge these three drum materials for density, conductivity and heat capacity. @GiudGiud if you want I can send in a followup PR in MOOSE for this extension.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
see your original PR I left a comment talking about doing a vector of properties
I dont think it's that good of an idea, because that would mean evaluating all properties every time
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are evaluating these segment materials currently in this way as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is not the point I was making at there.
If you define properties a b c d in a single material and are using property a in an auxkernel then a b c and d are all computed in the réunit for that auxkernel.
But if you have one material for each property then you're fine, only computing one.
If you want to do the work to enable the grouping (because you think it's better for the user input) I ll approve it anyway
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see what you mean. I was thinking all will be used in residual evaluation. The extension should be quite simple and it reduces the duplications of drum geometry specifications in one input file. Let me come up a small PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated with the new change. Now + is smaller than - ;-)
YaqiWang
force-pushed
the
drum_thermal_prop
branch
3 times, most recently
from
a5a7d36 to
3ed265a
Compare
YaqiWang
force-pushed
the
drum_thermal_prop
branch
from
3ed265a to
d5c2ddb
Compare
2 participants
The new material proposed in MOOSE (idaholab/moose#32773) is still under review. I also need to run the model to make sure the correctness of the change. This closes #797.