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

Issue 1244 algebraic j #1280

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 10, 2020
Merged

Issue 1244 algebraic j #1280

merged 5 commits into from
Dec 10, 2020

Conversation

valentinsulzer
Copy link
Member

Description

Add an option to make the interfacial current density a state with an algebraic equation

Fixes #1244

Type of change

Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Optimization (back-end change that speeds up the code)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

  • No style issues: $ flake8
  • All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --unit
  • The documentation builds: $ cd docs and then $ make clean; make html

You can run all three at once, using $ python run-tests.py --quick.

Further checks:

  • Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 8, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #1280 (136a31f) into develop (0e6c78c) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1280   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    98.09%   98.09%           
========================================
  Files          270      270           
  Lines        15150    15155    +5     
========================================
+ Hits         14861    14866    +5     
  Misses         289      289           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...m/models/full_battery_models/base_battery_model.py 99.67% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
...ybamm/models/full_battery_models/lead_acid/full.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...dels/full_battery_models/lead_acid/higher_order.py 98.09% <100.00%> (ø)
...ybamm/models/full_battery_models/lead_acid/loqs.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...bamm/models/full_battery_models/lithium_ion/dfn.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...bamm/models/full_battery_models/lithium_ion/spm.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...amm/models/full_battery_models/lithium_ion/spme.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...dels/submodels/interface/kinetics/base_kinetics.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...dels/submodels/interface/kinetics/butler_volmer.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...models/submodels/interface/kinetics/no_reaction.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 1 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0e6c78c...136a31f. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Sponsor Member

@brosaplanella brosaplanella left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, just some minor comments. Thanks Tino!

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pybamm/models/full_battery_models/base_battery_model.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
"surface form": False,
"convection": False,
"surface form": "false",
"convection": "none",
Copy link
Sponsor Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Linked to my previous comment, how come here we use "none" instead of "false"?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is a bit arbitrary but I am basically using "false" if the other option is "true" and "none" otherwise, except for "surface form". "There is no convection" -> "convection: none" vs "We don't use the surface form" -> "surface form: false"

@valentinsulzer valentinsulzer merged commit bb12b86 into develop Dec 10, 2020
@valentinsulzer valentinsulzer deleted the issue-1244-algebraic-j branch December 10, 2020 00:07
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.

Algebraic equation for j
2 participants