feat(GWE): Introduce Groundwater Energy Transport #1493
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
emorway-usgs
force-pushed
the
gwe_3rd_time_a_charm
branch
3 times, most recently
from
039b9ba
to
4601d0f
Compare
emorway-usgs
force-pushed
the
gwe_3rd_time_a_charm
branch
from
42643d6
to
f82e6fd
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great, @emorway-usgs. I had a bunch of really minor comments in here that could all be addressed after a merge. Have a quick look and let me know if we should merge this morning.
On a more consequential note, we should probably discuss a bit more the package naming conventions for GWE. We can do this after the merge. For example, GWE has an MST Package, but the input for the MST Package is different from the input for the GWT MST Package. I wonder if this will ultimately cause confusion. Not sure there is a right or wrong answer, but we might think about whether the FYTPE uniquely describes a package or whether package format is now uniquely defined by MODELTYPE and FTYPE.
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
…and MODFLOW-USGS#1493 (comment) and reran mf6ivar.py, which updated the tex files in this commit
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2023
emorway-usgs
force-pushed
the
gwe_3rd_time_a_charm
branch
from
2828acb
to
bc75370
Compare
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
…and MODFLOW-USGS#1493 (comment) and reran mf6ivar.py, which updated the tex files in this commit
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 29, 2023
emorway-usgs
force-pushed
the
gwe_3rd_time_a_charm
branch
from
bc75370
to
1753af2
Compare
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2023
emorway-usgs
added a commit
to geohackweek/modflow6-tempfork
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2023
… is the dominant process in heat transport
…al solutions from Carslaw & Jaeger (1947)
… failing as downloaded contents from its failure are working locally.
emorway-usgs
force-pushed
the
gwe_3rd_time_a_charm
branch
from
5929f30
to
34125e7
Compare
… Actions doesn't yield the same output that the logs are reporting. This particular autotest has an analytical solution (and a plot) that might be better shown on the modflow6-examples repo anyway
5 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Perhaps there would be a way to generalize what's going on here and reduce duplication?
Let the PR fun begin...