THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. The following task has a new comment added:
FS#270 - Deprecating setDirichlet(eqIdx) User who did this - Bernd Flemisch (bernd) ---------- You don't specify Neumann for a primary variable, you specify it for an equation. Like the amount of wetting phase coming in, for which you would use contiWEqIdx. The bad thing is that no check is made to ensure consistency/completeness of the conditions. For example, if you specify setDirichlet(pressureIdx); setNeumann(contiWEqIdx); and a pw-Sn formulation is used, the second statement would overwrite the first one. But that's a different issue. To me, it doesn't make sense to specify one Dirichlet condition for more than one equation. The one equation that is specified rather stands for the equation that will be replaced by the Dirichlet condition, if the Dirichlet condition is incorporated in a strong sense. For box, this all is somehow clear, since Dirichlet is incorporated in a strong sense by default. Thus, mixed conditions can be treated easily. For cell-centered, it is not clear since you would want to incorporate Dirichlet conditions in a weak sense. This is only possible if all primary variables get Dirichlet conditions. Therefore, the current implementation checks if boundary conditions are mixed. If yes, also the cell-centered model gets a strong treatment ;-) ---------- More information can be found at the following URL: http://www.dumux.org/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=270#comment574 You are receiving this message because you have requested it from the Flyspray bugtracking system. If you did not expect this message or don't want to receive mails in future, you can change your notification settings at the URL shown above. _______________________________________________ Dumux mailing list [email protected] https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
