SWFlow update: Fixed parallel capabilities and changed the reflecting boundary condition set up

[ejtovar]

Mandatory Checklist

Please ensure that the following criteria are met:

• [x] Title of pull request describes the changes/features
• [x] Request at least 2 reviewers
• [x] If new files are being added, the files are no larger than 100kB. Post the file sizes.
• [x] Code coverage did not decrease. If this is a bug fix, a test should cover that bug fix. If a new feature is added, a test should be made to cover that feature.
• [ ] New features have appropriate documentation strings (readable by sphinx)
• [x] Contributor has read and agreed with CONTRIBUTING.md and has added themselves to CONTRIBUTORS.md

As a general rule of thumb, try to follow PEP8 guidelines.

Description

I have made changes to the SWFlow solvers that have fixed the parallel capabilities. I also generalized the boundary conditions so that the user can use reflecting conditions and Dirichlet conditions instead of being restricted to just one. I added two problem files mach_flow.py and obstacle_flow.py that highlights this.

I also made a small change to the Circle object in SpatialTools.py so that it can take in a boundaryTag provided by the user.

New files added:

proteus/tests/SWFlow/mach_flow.py -- 5KB proteus/tests/SWFlow/obstacle_flow.py -- 7KB

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Merging #1223 into master will increase coverage by 0.08%. The diff coverage is 71.68%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1223      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.14%   52.23%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         528      530       +2     
  Lines      109012   109364     +352     
==========================================
+ Hits        56847    57126     +279     
- Misses      52165    52238      +73     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
proteus/tests/SWFlow/mach_flow.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/runup.py	0.00% <ø> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/solitary_island.py	91.11% <ø> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/solitary_reef.py	93.81% <ø> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/solitary_wave.py	93.97% <ø> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/transcritical_bump.py	82.19% <ø> (ø)
proteus/tests/SWFlow/wet_well_balancing.py	0.00% <ø> (ø)
proteus/NonlinearSolvers.py	33.45% <30.00%> (-0.01%)	:arrow_down:
proteus/SWFlow/models/GN_sw_n.py	94.00% <50.00%> (-1.92%)	:arrow_down:
proteus/SpatialTools.py	54.48% <60.52%> (+4.71%)	:arrow_up:
... and 10 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update b4ee445...3039535. Read the comment docs.

[zhang-alvin]

It looks like the code coverage is dropping by a significant amount. Do you know what's causing that @ejtovar ?

[ejtovar]

No not too sure, let me investigate.

[cekees]

Looks like just the new test failing to get 7 sig figs on linux. Not sure what's going on--don't have a linux machine at the moment.

[ejtovar]

@cekees Yeah I'm not sure why the test is failing. I'm comparing both solutions and they look the "same".