-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
add velocity infrastructure. #761
Merged
MFraters
merged 9 commits into
GeodynamicWorldBuilder:main
from
MFraters:add_velocity_infrastructure
Oct 20, 2024
Merged
add velocity infrastructure. #761
MFraters
merged 9 commits into
GeodynamicWorldBuilder:main
from
MFraters:add_velocity_infrastructure
Oct 20, 2024
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
MFraters
added
add/change code functionality
Requests or proposes new or improved code (internal) functionality
add/change user functionality
Requests or proposes a new or improved user functionality
labels
Oct 13, 2024
MFraters
force-pushed
the
add_velocity_infrastructure
branch
from
October 14, 2024 10:25
b9c1f3f
to
7f635d0
Compare
|
MFraters
force-pushed
the
add_velocity_infrastructure
branch
3 times, most recently
from
October 20, 2024 10:38
189247f
to
7c5b26c
Compare
MFraters
changed the title
[WIP] add velocity infrastructure.
add velocity infrastructure.
Oct 20, 2024
MFraters
force-pushed
the
add_velocity_infrastructure
branch
from
October 20, 2024 10:52
7c5b26c
to
be1d85b
Compare
This is almost ready to merge I think. It also contains some other items, including an option to replace the reference results from any test that fails, and limiting the resolution of the doc_* tests to improve tester performance. |
MFraters
force-pushed
the
add_velocity_infrastructure
branch
6 times, most recently
from
October 20, 2024 13:52
c4e6c02
to
564be5e
Compare
…esult update variable.
MFraters
force-pushed
the
add_velocity_infrastructure
branch
from
October 20, 2024 13:53
564be5e
to
076aad2
Compare
MFraters
added
the
ready to merge
Pull request is ready to merge. May be waiting for tests to complete or other reviews.
label
Oct 20, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
add/change code functionality
Requests or proposes new or improved code (internal) functionality
add/change user functionality
Requests or proposes a new or improved user functionality
ready to merge
Pull request is ready to merge. May be waiting for tests to complete or other reviews.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request implements #528. It is still very rudementary and a work in progress.
I am thinking of renaming the current
uniform
models toraw
, since they just work with raw velocity input. I think theuniform
model should be more useful, given that it is usually the simple default model. I think uniform in this case should not make the same value everywhere (which is would raw (constant?) would be, but for example uniform in continent would provide a direction, dip and magnitude (which is more like how the rest of the models work, 2d top down + dip) and for a slab or fault it would be relative to the slab geometry. In spherical uniform should also be relative to the geometry.Example of current functionality: