please resend your patches...CCR

[Willem Ferguson]

Hallo Robert,

I would agree that the cylinder pressure logging functions could do well 
within a separate source file. But such a separate file would be 
dependent on definitions in /profile.c/, the most important of which is 
the /plot_info/ structure.

The actual work is being done at a high level by 
/populate_pressure_information/. The functions called lower down are 
helpers in order to populate the pressure data. That is the problem. 
Initially I suggested that the diluent cylinder be assigned as cylinder 
n, if there are n cylinders (indexed 0 - (n-1)). However a discussion 
between myself and Dirk resulted in a decision to keep the pressure data 
for the diluent cylinder completely separate and not alongside the 
pressure data for the other cylinders. As you can remember, Subsurface 
currently only keeps a single history of cylinder pressure. If there are 
cylinder changes, this single history contains the individual pressure 
data for all cylinders *while each one was being used*. For CCR, we need 
to keep a completely separate history that only reflects the diluent 
gas. This is because in the case of CCR we need TWO complete pressure 
histories (oxygen and diluent). This means that computation for the two 
histories are not necessarily identical or symmetrical.

I am on the point of rebuilding my computer and will be offline for two 
days. After that I hope to dive until Sunday. If it's ok, I would like 
to take up the discussion again next week? I think your ideas are really 
worth talking about. Your opinion is not irrelevant.

Kind regards,
Willem




On 12/08/2014 11:55, Robert Helling wrote:
>
> On 12.08.2014, at 10:56, Willem Ferguson 
> <willemferguson at zoology.up.ac.za 
> <mailto:willemferguson at zoology.up.ac.za>> wrote:
>
> Willem,
>
>> So I need advice from the experts in this forum. What is the most
>> sensible way to go about this?
>
> my irrelevant opinion is the following: First of all, profile.c is 
> already quite long with 1.5klines of code, why not take the gas 
> handling functions to a separate file (as a first patch)?
>
> Then, is it really a good idea to do the loop over gases (dillutant 
> and oxygen) in the outer functions and call the inner functions twice? 
> Why not do the loop only in the innermost function, e.g. in 
> get_pr_interpolate_data interpolate possibly two rather than one gas? 
> Then you don’t have to apply changes everywhere?
>
> Best
> Robert
>
> -- 
> .oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oO
> Robert C. Helling     Elite Master Course Theoretical and Mathematical 
> Physics
>                       Scientific Coordinator
>                       Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen, Dept. 
> Physik
>                       Phone: +49 89 2180-4523  Theresienstr. 39, rm. B339
> http://www.atdotde.de
>
> Enhance your privacy, use cryptography! My PGP keys have fingerprints
> A9D1 A01D 13A5 31FA 6515  BB44 0820 367C 36BC 0C1D    and
> DCED 37B6 251C 7861 270D  5613 95C7 9D32 9A8D 9B8F
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hohndel.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20140813/344a89c3/attachment.html>