Skip to content
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

Improve pressure handling in incompressible Navier Stokes example #508

Open
termi-official opened this issue Oct 5, 2022 · 5 comments
Open
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@termi-official
Copy link
Member

Pressure handling does not work very consistently for now, because the current choice for the solver does not resolve the constant consistently.

@termi-official
Copy link
Member Author

We will work on this once SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#1570 is resolved

@KnutAM
Copy link
Member

KnutAM commented Aug 4, 2024

I thought #917 solved this, but seeing the following failure here? Is that related?

@termi-official
Copy link
Member Author

I thought #917 solved this, but seeing the following failure here? Is that related?

Technically yes, but the solution is not very clean yet.

Also, I cannot reproduce the error and master CI is also green. Will try to take a look next week, but I am really tight on time, so do not expect too much from my side on this.

@KnutAM
Copy link
Member

KnutAM commented Aug 4, 2024

Should we just disable this test then, and use this issue to track its solution?
Possibly also add a warning to the example?

It's a bit annoying with sporadic unrelated CI failures...

@termi-official
Copy link
Member Author

termi-official commented Aug 5, 2024

Should we just disable this test then, and use this issue to track its solution? Possibly also add a warning to the example?

It's a bit annoying with sporadic unrelated CI failures...

If we change something which triggers failure in the CI we should first investigate why the CI fails.

While I agree that sporadic CI failures are annoying, this issue is actually related to the linked example drove gmsh into a faulty state. See #799 (comment) .

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants