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

Remove revxrange #81

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2021
Merged

Remove revxrange #81

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2021

Conversation

charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member

I think that this is done correctly, note that we're not traversing the term_vel[k] = terminal_velocity(Rain.C_drag, Rain.MP_n_0, QR.values[k], self.Ref.rho0_half[k]) in reverse order, since I don't think that should have any impact on the result.

@trontrytel
Copy link
Member

I think that this is done correctly, note that we're not traversing the term_vel[k] = terminal_velocity(Rain.C_drag, Rain.MP_n_0, QR.values[k], self.Ref.rho0_half[k]) in reverse order, since I don't think that should have any impact on the result.

Not sure. The idea was to integrate the rain from top down because it is falling down and we are using upwind to do it

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member Author

Not sure. The idea was to integrate the rain from top down because it is falling down and we are using upwind to do it

We're still looping in reverse order in the loop below, I think the loop I changed the order on simply populates term_vel--it doesn't look like that loop depends on the order (unless it's for a simplified case, in which case I'm more than happy to keep it in reverse order).

@trontrytel
Copy link
Member

Not sure. The idea was to integrate the rain from top down because it is falling down and we are using upwind to do it

We're still looping in reverse order in the loop below, I think the loop I changed the order on simply populates term_vel--it doesn't look like that loop depends on the order (unless it's for a simplified case, in which case I'm more than happy to keep it in reverse order).

You are right. I think this should be ok

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member Author

bors r+

@bors bors bot merged commit 56d3b37 into main Aug 5, 2021
@bors bors bot deleted the ck/rm_revxrange branch August 5, 2021 19:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants