Skip to content

Conversation

@Anthony-Bowers08
Copy link

(Ref. #261)

@simopier simopier self-assigned this Sep 11, 2025
@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Precheck, step Format Check Clang on 9de470e wanted to post the following:

Your code requires style changes.

A patch was auto generated and copied here
You can directly apply the patch by running, in the top level of your repository:

curl -s https://mooseframework.inl.gov/tmap8/docs/PRs/292/clang_format/style.patch | git apply -v

Alternatively, with your repository up to date and in the top level of your repository:

git clang-format f80c7cbf05da1708e8727a3451d736ca224c5d74

@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Coverage, step Generate coverage on f0140fa wanted to post the following:

Coverage

f80c7c #292 f0140f
Total Total +/- New
Rate 91.30% 88.08% -3.22% 100.00%
Hits 1049 1049 - 42
Misses 100 142 +42 0

Diff coverage report

Full coverage report

This comment will be updated on new commits.

@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Coverage, step Verify coverage on f0140fa wanted to post the following:

The following coverage requirement(s) failed:

  • Coverage rate 88.08% is less than the required 90.0%

@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Documentation, step Sync to remote on f0140fa wanted to post the following:

View the site here

This comment will be updated on new commits.

@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Build test summary, step Build test summary on f0140fa wanted to post the following:

Test summary

Compared against f80c7cb in job civet.inl.gov/job/3342972.

Removed tests

Added tests

Run time changes

@moosebuild
Copy link

Job Coverage, step Verify coverage on f0140fa wanted to post the following:

The following coverage requirement(s) failed:

  • Coverage rate 88.08% is less than the required 90.0%

Copy link
Collaborator

@simopier simopier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for this @Anthony-Bowers08!

I have several high level requests/suggestions:

  1. Instead of adding a new material class, you should instead apply this in the existing ADMatInterfaceReactionYHxPCT class. There, you will see this if statement:
if (!_silence_warnings && ((neighbor_pressure < limit_pressure) || (neighbor_pressure > 1.e6)))

You should edit this if statement so that if the neighbor_pressure is above 1.e6 or lower than ~2.e2 (the lower pressure at which we have data if I remember properly), then an error is provided, if it is between 1.e6 and limit_pressure, then the current calculations for the high pressure regime is applied, and if it is between 2.e2 and limit_pressure, then it calculates the atomic fraction at the surface following the new equation you are proposing.
I think that should do it, and capture the plateau region. My concern is that we might see some oscillations around the plateau region, but we can test that and deploy a solution once we observe that.

  1. I see that you have created an input file and submitted gold file, which is great. However, you need to also edit the test file related to this capability and add tests for all the configurations in the if statement above, with a particular focus on the new cases you are creating. The reason why the coverage currently fails is because despite adding a new input file, no additional test is being run.
    Note also that rather than create a brand new input file, you should instead use the cli_args option in the test file to utilize the existing file, but in the regime of interest to you. You will find example of that in the test file.

  2. You will also need to update the documentation page (format in .md) to detail your new contribution to the existing capabilities.

  3. Your python script should be merged with the existing one for ADMatInterfaceReactionYHxPCT. Do it all in there.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants