Fix using reactors with both surface and gas phase chemistry with YAML input#981
Merged
Merged
Conversation
bryanwweber
approved these changes
Mar 19, 2021
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Changes proposed in this pull request
InterfaceKineticsobjectThe functions for creating
InterfaceKineticsobjects from YAML input files results in having the surface (reacting) phase as the first phase, in contrast to the functions for creating these objects from CTI/XML files, which put the surface last. This led to a few errors as identified by @ischoegl, which were fixed by @bryanwweber in #905.However, there was actually a check in
Reactor::initializethat was meant to make sure that theInterfaceKineticsobject was ordered such that the gas phase came first, as would occur with CTI input files. It just turns out that the examples which were exercising this only include reactors where there are no gas phase reactions, and this check was erroneously not running in that case. But thanks to #905, we can remove it now. I noticed this problem while trying to run the Matlabsurfreactor.mexample.Checklist
scons build&scons test) and unit tests address code coverage