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

Navier-Stokes Test Case: Viscous Shock propagation #2173

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Nov 27, 2024

Conversation

DanielDoehring
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds elixirs for the Becker-Morduchow-Libby solution of a 1D viscous moving shock.
Can be used to test for convergence without source terms as for the manufactured solution test cases.

Convergence study for the 2D case:

####################################################################################################
l2
rho                 rho_v1              rho_v2              rho_e               
error     EOC       error     EOC       error     EOC       error     EOC       
3.76e-03  -         3.11e-03  -         8.27e-17  -         3.26e-03  -         
3.55e-04  3.41      2.45e-04  3.67      7.40e-16  -3.16     2.72e-04  3.58      
5.80e-05  2.61      2.92e-05  3.07      2.58e-11  -15.09    3.68e-05  2.89      
4.09e-06  3.82      1.93e-06  3.92      1.82e-11  0.51      2.45e-06  3.91      
2.50e-07  4.03      1.50e-07  3.69      6.79e-12  1.42      1.71e-07  3.84      

mean      3.47      mean      3.59      mean      -4.08     mean      3.56      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
linf
rho                 rho_v1              rho_v2              rho_e               
error     EOC       error     EOC       error     EOC       error     EOC       
1.93e-02  -         1.39e-02  -         4.78e-16  -         1.50e-02  -         
2.20e-03  3.13      2.18e-03  2.67      4.80e-15  -3.33     2.00e-03  2.90      
7.49e-04  1.56      4.42e-04  2.30      7.95e-10  -17.34    5.24e-04  1.93      
5.00e-05  3.91      3.06e-05  3.85      6.66e-10  0.26      3.61e-05  3.86      
2.82e-06  4.15      1.91e-06  4.00      2.84e-10  1.23      2.25e-06  4.01      

mean      3.19      mean      3.21      mean      -4.80     mean      3.18      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring added enhancement New feature or request testing labels Nov 20, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

  • The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
  • All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
  • No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

  • The code can be understood easily.
  • Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
  • There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
  • There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
  • The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

  • New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
  • Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
  • Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
  • Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
  • If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md with its PR number.

Testing

  • The PR passes all tests.
  • New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
  • New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

  • There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
  • If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

  • The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
  • If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
    are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.37%. Comparing base (987fa7e) to head (9617641).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2173      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.36%   96.37%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         480      483       +3     
  Lines       38230    38329      +99     
==========================================
+ Hits        36840    36939      +99     
  Misses       1390     1390              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 96.37% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@ranocha
Copy link
Member

ranocha commented Nov 20, 2024

@DanielDoehring
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, for some reason there are allocations due to the boundary conditions. I hope I can figure it out...

@ranocha
Copy link
Member

ranocha commented Nov 21, 2024

Yeah, for some reason there are allocations due to the boundary conditions. I hope I can figure it out...

You use a lot of global variables

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring marked this pull request as draft November 21, 2024 07:44
@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2024 08:47
Copy link
Member

@ranocha ranocha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring marked this pull request as draft November 22, 2024 09:38
@DanielDoehring
Copy link
Contributor Author

DanielDoehring commented Nov 22, 2024

There is one thing I need to double-check before this should be merged

@DanielDoehring
Copy link
Contributor Author

Alright good to go.

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring marked this pull request as ready for review November 22, 2024 10:28
Copy link
Member

@andrewwinters5000 andrewwinters5000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@sloede sloede enabled auto-merge (squash) November 27, 2024 05:28
Copy link
Member

@ranocha ranocha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@sloede sloede merged commit 897c1cd into trixi-framework:main Nov 27, 2024
37 checks passed
@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring deleted the ViscousShock branch November 27, 2024 21:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request testing
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants