-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 122
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Actually respect NUPCOL (not NUPCOL+1) and allow network to converge with GLO #6100
Conversation
…also with gas lift optimization.
jenkins build this failure_report please |
Note. I have a PR where this code is refactored. #6095 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the contribution. I just have one minor question.
@@ -1743,7 +1751,7 @@ namespace Opm { | |||
|
|||
|
|||
template<typename TypeTag> | |||
std::pair<bool, bool> | |||
std::tuple<bool, bool, typename BlackoilWellModel<TypeTag>::Scalar> | |||
BlackoilWellModel<TypeTag>:: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cant you just use Scalar here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe I tried that first, and it didn't compile at my end (GCC13)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Scalar has no meaning in the context as the return value is defined "outside" the class context. typename is required.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks. I see that now. @vkip can you undraft this if you think it is ready for merging.
jenkins build this failure_report please |
Test failures are mainly due to different time-stepping. I've been through all the failed tests with shorter time-steps and find results to be (visually) identical to master, except for two tests that differ in a single time-step - these become identical to master when using NUPCOL=11. |
Thanks for looking into the test failures. I will start the process of updating the reference results and merging this. |
jenkins build this update_data please |
Reason: PR OPM/opm-simulators#6100 opm-common = 034b510205f219335dd01f8b7770990102df6b12 opm-grid = 80c23280f8eb5ab7b6ad955c6c400b19e041f663 opm-simulators = a818aaf168a3ef196eeff0ec90567814062576ab ### Changed Tests ### * udq_wconprod * gconprod_t1l * udq_pyaction * 9_3a_grpctl_msw_model2 * 9_3b_grpctl_msw_model2 * 9_3d_grpctl_stw_model2 * 9_3d_grpctl_msw_model2 * 9_4a_grpctl_stw_model2 * 9_4a_grpctl_msw_model2 * 9_4b_grpctl_msw_model2 * wvfpexp_02 * krnum_02z * network_01_wtest
jenkins build this opm-tests=1322 please |
Automatic Reference Data Update for PR OPM/opm-simulators#6100
Also: