-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
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
Clarification on positiveMax implementation #3508
Comments
I'm not sure; I think one possibility was What I can see is that these formulas aren't very clear (some variables have subscripts - some depend on them and don't have subscripts), and they should be cleaned up. What I can see are some major considerations:
|
Adding this to me meeting just to see if anyone knows who can investigate. I don't expect anyone to know the answer. |
Phone meeting: @casella can you try to give some more input on what the desired solution is? |
Let me recap. The stream connector concept automatically formulates balance equations for advectively carried quantities. These equations become undetermined when all flow rates go to zero, so in order to avoid that, we tweak the calculations when all flow rates become very small, thus obtaining a formulation that is continuous and always well defined. The question is, what is a very small flow rate? The answer of course depends on the specific application: a small flow rate in a Gen IV molten-lead-cooled power plant (order of magnitude about 100,000 kg/s) is much different from a small flow rate in a pharmaceutical production plant (order of magnitude about 0.001 kg/s). So, we need to somehow take into account the magnitude of the flow rates, using their If all the flows in the connection set have the same order of magnitude, that's no big deal. What if there is one small leak flow? Well, consider the case in which all the big flows are exactly zero and only the small leak flow is present: in this case, the mixing quantity (e.g. the specific enthalpy) is entirely determined by the actual flow rate of the small leak flow. This should be approximated (thus give actually wrong results) only when it is very small compared to its typical order of magnitude, i.e. its nominal attribute. So, I would consider the min value of all the relevant flow variables. Hence, considering the kind of pseudo-code already employed in that part of the specification, a reasonable and easily implemented solution would be: eps := relativeTolerance*min(nominal(mj.c.m_flow) for j in 1:N); ` Strictly speaking, the set over which the min attribute should be computed is not the whole connection set (all the connectors |
Language phone meeting: casella: should be possible to use the simplest variant (all variables). |
However, need to verify - reports that it failed in some rare cases for small flows. (Possibly for Modelon Hydraulics.) Try to make example. |
The sophisticated implementation of
positiveMax()
in Section 15.2 contains the following definition:It's not clear what is the meaning of
min(nominal(mj.c.m_flow))
. From what I remember, the idea was to consider the minimum nominal attribute of all flows involved in the connection set, so I guess this should bemin(nominal(mj.c.m_flow) for j in 1:N)
, or possiblymin(nominal(mj.c.m_flow) for j in cat(1, 1:i-1, i+1:N))
if we want to exclude the nominal attribute of the flow of the i-th connector, which is irrelevant when computinginStream()
.@HansOlsson can you please confirm?
Keeping @perost in the loop.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: