updated R1 variable ToroidalFieldCoilTripleArc

[billingsley-john]

Proposed changes

PR which updates the ToroidalFieldCoilTripleArc class so that the R1 variable is used correctly, as described in the documentation.

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to the Paramak? Put an x in the boxes that apply

• [x] Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• [ ] Code refactoring
• [ ] Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
• [ ] New tests

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

• [x] Pep8 applied
• [ ] Unit tests pass locally with my changes
• [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• [ ] I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

[billingsley-john]

Resolves #785

[billingsley-john]

ToroidalFieldCoilPrincetonD has a similar issue; however, is documented correctly. How do you feel @Shimwell @RemDelaporteMathurin about this? I think both R1 values in both classes should correspond to the same distance, it is a question of whether it's the inner or outer distance? One thing to note is that TFCoilPrincetonD also has R2, which is an 'inner' radius, perhaps, R1 should do the same, which would suggest updating the image for TfCoilTripleArc rather than the class.

[shimwell]

I have a slight preference for inner distance as I think it makes the radial build easier and allows us to keep the same diagram

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Merging #786 (8f810bd) into develop (b47811f) will not change coverage. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #786   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    95.29%   95.29%           
========================================
  Files           74       74           
  Lines         4828     4828           
========================================
  Hits          4601     4601           
  Misses         227      227           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...etric_components/toroidal_field_coil_triple_arc.py	100.00% <ø> (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 b47811f...8f810bd. Read the comment docs.

[RemDelaporteMathurin]

ToroidalFieldCoilPrincetonD has a similar issue; however, is documented correctly. How do you feel @Shimwell @RemDelaporteMathurin about this? I think both R1 values in both classes should correspond to the same distance, it is a question of whether it's the inner or outer distance?

I agree with @Shimwell , inner is best.

One thing to note is that TFCoilPrincetonD also has R2, which is an 'inner' radius, perhaps, R1 should do the same, which would suggest updating the image for TfCoilTripleArc rather than the class.

I do agree that R1 should be a inner radius as it makes it easier - I think - to build with it.

[billingsley-john]

ToroidalFieldCoilPrincetonD has a similar issue; however, is documented correctly. How do you feel @Shimwell @RemDelaporteMathurin about this? I think both R1 values in both classes should correspond to the same distance, it is a question of whether it's the inner or outer distance?

I agree with @Shimwell , inner is best.

One thing to note is that TFCoilPrincetonD also has R2, which is an 'inner' radius, perhaps, R1 should do the same, which would suggest updating the image for TfCoilTripleArc rather than the class.

I do agree that R1 should be a inner radius as it makes it easier - I think - to build with it.

I agree with you both - as in R1 as outlined in the documentation.