Skip to content
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

First step of generalizing the time domain integrator component to mphys builders #139

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 10, 2024

Conversation

kejacobson
Copy link
Collaborator

Progress on issue #8.

  • Extend builders to time domain
  • Add mphys integrator and timestep classes
  • Add aerostructural integrator and timestep. Integrator currently only has primal analysis.
  • Add version of the time domain modal example that uses this more mphys-like way of assembling the model.

@kejacobson kejacobson requested a review from anilyil March 20, 2023 16:25
Copy link
Collaborator

@anilyil anilyil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The changes look good and I am fine with merging this as is. One comment: do we want to include the mphys_time_derivative tag in the documentation or skip it for now because its work in progress?

@friedenhe
Copy link
Collaborator

I wanted to test this feature but haven't gotten a chance yet. I can do the test after it is merged.

@kejacobson kejacobson requested a review from anilyil September 18, 2023 15:27
@kejacobson
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The changes look good and I am fine with merging this as is. One comment: do we want to include the mphys_time_derivative tag in the documentation or skip it for now because its work in progress?

I think we'll leave it out of the documentation for now.

Copy link
Collaborator

@anilyil anilyil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The code changes look good to me. I just have a few comments on the readme file for the tests. I can also make these changes if you walk me through the details, @kejacobson.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can expand this explanation a bit. Reading it as an outsider to the time domain stuff, I had to do a few iterations to understand what is going on. I say the following items need clarification:

  • In the first sentence, explain there are 2 versions of doing it. There are 3 paragraphs below, which confused me initially. We can include a brief explanation of what each method does in the first paragraph, and give the detailed explanation of what each directory contains below.
  • We can expand the explanation for the two versions a bit more. Maybe highlight more differences between the two?
  • The builder version explanation was a bit confusing. Is this an example class template for these models? Also you mention needing to replace the existing components with MELD, but if this example does work, to me, replacing it with MELD would just result in a different example. Can you explain this a bit more?

@timryanb timryanb linked an issue Nov 27, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@anilyil anilyil self-requested a review April 10, 2024 19:07
@kejacobson kejacobson merged commit 113d701 into OpenMDAO:main Apr 10, 2024
1 check passed
@kejacobson kejacobson deleted the time_domain branch April 10, 2024 19:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Time-domain coupling
3 participants