-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 164
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
Inconsistencies between engines of Mechanics.MultiBody.Examples.Loops #3132
Labels
example
Issue only addresses example(s)
L: Mechanics.MultiBody
Issue addresses Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody
Milestone
Comments
I will provide a consistent modeling from my MSL fork via a pull request. |
christoff-buerger
added a commit
to christoff-buerger/ModelicaStandardLibrary
that referenced
this issue
Oct 4, 2019
Added respective pull request #3133. |
Just for the future. It is not necessary to open up an issue in addition of a PR. The PR can be discussed in the PR itself while keeping the number duplicate issue numbers down. |
dietmarw
added
the
L: Mechanics.MultiBody
Issue addresses Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody
label
Oct 4, 2019
christoff-buerger
added a commit
to christoff-buerger/ModelicaStandardLibrary
that referenced
this issue
Oct 9, 2019
…lings are now diagramatically represented, improved diagram layout, improved documentation, eliminated rotational clock duplicate and use of engine synchronization instead as single source of sampling)." This reverts commit 9dc348d. As requested in modelica#3132 by @beutlich.
christoff-buerger
added a commit
to christoff-buerger/ModelicaStandardLibrary
that referenced
this issue
Oct 9, 2019
…lings are now diagramatically represented, improved diagram layout, improved documentation, eliminated rotational clock duplicate and use of engine synchronization instead as single source of sampling)." This reverts commit ad35571. As requested in modelica#3132 by @beutlich.
beutlich
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 9, 2019
* #3132: Made engine designs consistent w.r.t. the whole design scenario. * Redesign object diagram * Extend from Engine1bBase (for consistency with other Engine1X examples) * Change order of instances in model code
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
example
Issue only addresses example(s)
L: Mechanics.MultiBody
Issue addresses Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody
At the Modelica conference this year I presented a language extension for non-monotonic modeling (cf. Modelica language extensions for practical non-monotonic modelling: on the need for selective model extension). One of its running examples are the
Engine1a
,Engine1b
andEngine1b_analytic
models ofMechanics.MultiBody.Examples.Loops
I used to demonstrate how easy consistency problems are introduced. The idea of these models is to design a final analytic engine model starting from an idealized model via one considering the gas force in the cylinder. They are inconsistent however, most likely because of historically individual model-changes that have not been properly propagated throughout the whole design scenario.The objective of this ticket is to fix these inconsistencies by the ordinary means of Modelica 3.4 (i.e., not selective model extension, but simply manual fixing).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: