Compare and document accuracy of results in partitioned heat conduction (OpenFOAM vs FEniCS)
Open
@MakisH is already working on this.
Since Oct 19, 2024.
student
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 142
- Forks
- 167
- Avg merge
- 20h 24m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 11
Description
Originally posted by @BenjaminRodenberg in https://github.com/precice/tutorials/pull/406#pullrequestreview-1809133053
I guess there was already an error/inaccuracy (compared to the FEniCS case) in how you are treating the boundary conditions before. I would suggest to open an issue and try to fix this to reach the same accuracy as for the FEniCS case without subcycling in a separate PR. Not sure whether this is actually possible with OpenFOAM: In FEniCS, I needed 2nd order FEM to do the trick with the flux. I have no idea about the capabilities of OpenFOAM and FV here.
Contributor guide
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.
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.