Fix PEC-Insulator boundary condition with staggering #5451
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
dpgrote
commented
Nov 12, 2024
| @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ geometry.prob_hi = 1.e-2 3.e-2 | |||
|
|
|||
| # Boundary condition | |||
| boundary.field_lo = neumann periodic | |||
| boundary.field_hi = PECInsulator periodic | |||
| boundary.field_hi = pec_insulator periodic | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an incidental fix, making the name consistent with what is in the documentation.
JustinRayAngus
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When calculating the location of the fields to determine whether the field is on a PEC or insulator boundary, add the appropriate shift to account for the staggering of the fields.