Closed shimwell closed 4 years ago
Not to derail the train, would it not make more sense to put temperature on a cell rather than a material?
:exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (
develop@024b7b7
). Click here to learn what that means. The diff coverage is92.59%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #101 +/- ##
==========================================
Coverage ? 94.34%
==========================================
Files ? 3
Lines ? 548
Branches ? 0
==========================================
Hits ? 517
Misses ? 31
Partials ? 0
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
neutronics_material_maker/mutlimaterial.py | 93.57% <91.30%> (ø) |
|
neutronics_material_maker/material.py | 94.10% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
neutronics_material_maker/utils.py | 96.38% <100.00%> (ø) |
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 024b7b7...3b0edc9. Read the comment docs.
Not to derail the train, would it not make more sense to put temperature on a cell rather than a material?
Just for anyone reading this, chatted with Andy offline. In the end it is sometimes better to have temperatures on cells (which this package can't help with) and sometimes better to have temperatures on materials (which this package can help with). Going ahead with this feature to help in the situations where users want temperatures on the materials.
This PR will address #69 which mentions lack of temperature support in the serpent and openmc materials
ToDo
[x] Serpent materials tmp card addition
[x] OpenMC material tmp setting
[x] Tests for serpent
[x] Tests for OpenMC