REFPROP v9.1 vs v10.0
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- MATLAB
- Stars
- 13
- Forks
- 8
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I'm updating the code to use the REFPROP 10.0 database and I was wondering if there was a specific reason to use correlations instead of direct REFPROP calls for : Tv20, rho_L1, TL1, rho_L2, TL2, qh1, qh2?
Thx
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No file or test is named. Locate where Tv20, rho_L1, TL1, rho_L2, TL2, qh1, and qh2 are calculated, then compare the existing correlations with REFPROP 10.0 behavior. Done means reaching and documenting a decision about direct REFPROP calls versus correlations for each quantity.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- matlab
- Domain
- data
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100