Add setting for some assemblies to skip axial expansion

[albeanth]

Description

It may be desired to have some assemblies skip axial expansion routines. This PR adds a setting, assemFlagsToSkipAxialExpansion to accomplish this.

Users can provide assembly flags in a list in the input setting. If an assembly contains a flag that matches those listed, it is skipped for axial expansion.

---

Checklist

• This PR has only one purpose or idea.
• Tests have been added/updated to verify that the new/changed code works.

• The code style follows good practices.
• The commit message(s) follow good practices.

• The release notes (location doc/release/0.X.rst) are up-to-date with any bug fixes or new features.
• The documentation is still up-to-date in the doc folder.
• The dependencies are still up-to-date in setup.py.

[albeanth]

@onufer FYI

[keckler]

A few comments, one of which (with the skipping of the control assems) I would like to get answered before approval.

[keckler]

It would seem better to me to just pass the flags directly. That way someone who has the flags doesn't need to de-convert them into strings in order to use this function.

[albeanth]

Addressed 32ce614

[keckler]

This is not incredibly important, but...

With this change, you change the API of expandCoddDimsToHot(). And in fact you make the new parameter mandatory, so the change is also not backwards compatible.

My inclination would be to avoid changing the signature of expandColdDimsToHot(), and instead to just whittle down the list returned from self.assemblies.values() right here when you pass it in. Something like the following:

assemsToExpand = [a for a in list(self.assemblies.values()) if not a.hasFlags(cs[CONF_ASSEM_FLAGS_SKIP_AXIAL_EXP])
axialExpansionChanger.expandColdDimsToHot(assemsToExpand, cs[CONF_DETAILED_AXIAL_EXPANSION])

Just a suggestion.

[albeanth]

Addressed. 32ce614

[crswong888]

Assuming it's okay to require exact type IDs here, e.g., "duct" wouldn't match "innerduct", you could just do the following:

Suggested change

	if a.hasFlags(Flags.CONTROL) or any(a.hasFlags(aFlags) for aFlags in aToSkip):
	continue
	if a.hasFlags(Flags.CONTROL) or a.hasFlags(aToSkip, exact=True):
	continue

[albeanth]

My concern with using exact if you have the following:

import armi
armi.configure()
from armi.reactor.blocks import HexBlock

b0 = HexBlock("fuel")
b0.setType("fuel")
b1 = HexBlock("outer fuel")
b1.setType("outer fuel")

# Part 1: Use exact to get false negative
print(b1.hasFlags(typeID=[b0.p.flags]))
print(b1.hasFlags(typeID=[b0.p.flags], exact = True))

# Part 2: Gives false negative always
print(b0.hasFlags(typeID=[b1.p.flags]))
print(b0.hasFlags(typeID=[b1.p.flags], exact = True))

# Part 3: The correction for part 2
print(any(b0.hasFlags(f) for f in b1.p.flags))
print(any(b0.hasFlags(f, exact=True) for f in b1.p.flags))

which prints

True
False
False
False
True
True

So using the any approach is a bit more robust, I think. And since in that case we're checking flags one by one, the use of exact is irrelevant. This same approach is also used in Core::processLoading here,

armi/armi/reactor/reactors.py

Lines 2272 to 2276 in c8a40c7

	uniformAssems = [
	a
	for a in self.getAssemblies()
	if not any(a.hasFlags(f) for f in nonUniformAssems)
	]

[john-science]

@albeanth This is sitting in a queue for a downstream project. Merging one day soon, hopefully.