search

SPECFEM / specfem3d

SPECFEM3D_Cartesian simulates acoustic (fluid), elastic (solid), coupled acoustic/elastic, poroelastic or seismic wave propagation in any type of conforming mesh of hexahedra (structured or not).
GNU General Public License v3.0
409 stars 227 forks source link

Added new parameter USE_OTHER_TIME_FUNCTION #1660

Closed homnath closed 9 months ago

homnath commented 9 months ago

In my view, the best way to reconcile source time functions for CMTSOLUTION and FORCESOLUTION is to create a new common parameter for both CMTSOLUTION and FORCESOLUTION similar to: SOURCE_TIME_FUNCTION = gaussian and get rid of USE_RICKER_TIME_FUNCTION from the Par_file and "source time function" from the FORCESOLUTION.However, to minimise the code changes, I have added a new parameter, USE_OTHER_TIME_FUNCTION, for now. Currently, it is implemented only for viscoelastic simulations, and the other available functions are Brune and Smooth Brune.

codecov[bot] commented 9 months ago

Codecov Report

Attention: 69 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (0321f61) 51.47% compared to head (69287a5) 39.41%.

Files Patch % Lines
src/specfem3D/locate_source.F90 8.57% 32 Missing :warning:
src/specfem3D/setup_sources_receivers.f90 30.00% 14 Missing :warning:
src/specfem3D/compute_add_sources_viscoelastic.F90 7.14% 13 Missing :warning:
src/specfem3D/get_cmt.f90 37.50% 5 Missing :warning:
src/shared/read_parameter_file.F90 50.00% 3 Missing :warning:
...roblem_for_model/input_output/input_output_mod.f90 87.50% 1 Missing :warning:
src/shared/count_number_of_sources.f90 50.00% 1 Missing :warning:
Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## devel #1660 +/- ## =========================================== - Coverage 51.47% 39.41% -12.06% =========================================== Files 266 266 Lines 60241 60331 +90 =========================================== - Hits 31009 23780 -7229 - Misses 29232 36551 +7319 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

homnath commented 9 months ago

I have no idea why it is failing for "Test run example 4 - small adjoint" because I do not touch the inverse part.