You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Eq 57 in the MPET paper is implemented incorrectly in the software, should either be implemented as
F = - D* Dfunc/T * (dmu/dc) \nabla c if assuming not dilute solution model (and dc/dmu \approx Dfunc/T)
or
F = - D * \nabla c. (I am leaning towards implementing this one since this is more physically accurate for comparisons with other software and it is the actual definition of the flux) @d-cogswell what do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Ooh, good catch. The last part of Eq 57 is wrong in the paper, the 1/RT gets canceled by the units of \mu when non-dimensionalized. Go with F = - D * \nabla c, it's faster to evaluate and we don't know what mu is for many models.
Yeah, I will keep the Dfunc since it is good for CHR. I think technically equation 57 is right and they just eat up the dmu/dc term in the Dchem though, but the implementation in MPET seems wrong
Eq 57 in the MPET paper is implemented incorrectly in the software, should either be implemented as
F = - D* Dfunc/T * (dmu/dc) \nabla c if assuming not dilute solution model (and dc/dmu \approx Dfunc/T)
or
F = - D * \nabla c. (I am leaning towards implementing this one since this is more physically accurate for comparisons with other software and it is the actual definition of the flux)
@d-cogswell what do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: