You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current floating wall implementation uses the following notation to specify floating walls:
subsection floating walls
set number of floating walls = 1
subsection wall 0
subsection point on wall
set x = 0
set y = 0
set z = 0
end
subsection normal vector
set nx = 0
set ny = 0
set nz = 1
end
set start time = 0
set end time = 4
end
end
My main gripe with this nomenclature is that we have moved away from using x, y , z as different variables to instead use lists of points (e.g. the point on the wall would be point on wall = 0, 0, 0) instead of using different variables. This is something that we should refactor in the short term.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Description
The silo examples works just fine. I just fixed some information within the example to make it slightly easier to read and fixed some typos there and there.
Comment
Reading this example made me realize that the way we manage floating walls is kinda lame, so I have opened an issue #1360 regarding this.
Co-authored-by: Laura Prieto Saavedra <[email protected]>
The current floating wall implementation uses the following notation to specify floating walls:
My main gripe with this nomenclature is that we have moved away from using x, y , z as different variables to instead use lists of points (e.g. the point on the wall would be point on wall = 0, 0, 0) instead of using different variables. This is something that we should refactor in the short term.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: