Fix get_flux_index and get_gradient_index for multi-flux materials - #19
Open
theronguo wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Fix get_flux_index and get_gradient_index for multi-flux materials#19theronguo wants to merge 1 commit into
theronguo wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
MaterialStateManager.get_flux_index and get_gradient_index were using the list position of the name as the start offset into the flat DOF array, rather than the cumulative sum of preceding entry sizes. For single-flux materials this worked by accident (list index 0 = offset 0), but for any material with multiple flux or gradient entries of size > 1 the returned indices were wrong, causing incorrect reads/writes in advance() and set_item().
Owner
|
Hi @theronguo thanks for spotting this. |
Author
|
Hi @bleyerj, |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
MaterialStateManager.get_flux_index and get_gradient_index were using the list position of the name as the start offset into the flat DOF array, rather than the cumulative sum of preceding entry sizes. For single-flux materials this worked by accident (list index 0 = offset 0), but for any material with multiple flux or gradient entries of size > 1 the returned indices were wrong, causing incorrect reads/writes in advance() and set_item().