Robert Timms
Robert Timms
@aabills does this overlap with what your did / are doing?
hey @isaacbasil the suggestion here is to define a function like ```python3 def process_discontinuities(discontinuities, t_eval): # make sure they are increasing in time discontinuities = sorted(discontinuities) # remove any identical...
It looks like the current implementation of `BoundaryValue` is only first-order accurate, see https://github.com/pybamm-team/PyBaMM/blob/develop/src/pybamm/spatial_methods/finite_volume.py#L954. The finite volume code could do with some cleaning up as it is pretty difficult to...
@Rishab87 thanks for addressing all the comments, looks great! @aabills I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes on this before merging, since you've been working on higher-dimensional models too
You're right, the call to orphans shouldn't be there. The error you are seeing is the same as in #5081 . This is fixed on #4893
@Dharshannan yes, this is the approach I would recommend
yeah, something like this is exactly what I had in mind
My opinion is that anything to do with the "state" of the model (initial SOC/voltage, initial temperature, etc.) shouldn't be part of the parameter set and instead should be passed...
yeah, so the way we do it is backwards IMO. we should get "initial..." parameters from others
Some of the terms in your `rhs` evaluate on edges in the finite volume scheme (gradients) and other on nodes (divergences of gradients). Note you can set a coordinate system...