[PULL REQUEST] VPM-B Attempt 2.
dirk at hohndel.org
Tue Jul 7 06:25:10 PDT 2015
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 08:41:56PM +1000, Rick Walsh wrote:
> Dirk, Jan,
> On 5 July 2015 at 23:56, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 12:27:23AM +0200, Jan Darowski wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > Here is another pull request. I hope now it's better. Everything was
> > > reorganized from scratch, the final code is almost the same.
> > I like the patches much better.
> > I agree with Robert that you could have squashed a couple together, but in
> > the end I felt it was better to just pull what you had.
> I've reattached the patch to use the same VPM configuration parameters used
> in other programs. This is necessary to match Eric Baker's 'benchmark'
> dive profile. The patch is the same as before, but hopefully with a better
> commit message and line wrapping.
Thanks for doing that. As ageneral rule, if I didn't apply a patch within
a couple of days it might be worth following up with me. I try to go back
and find patches, but if they aren't "thread starters with PATCH in the
title" I often miss them.
> The second patch adds units to the structure comments (but not in the
> variable names). I'm confused by the units for surface_tension_gamma and
> skin_compression_gammaC. According to
> surface_tension_gamma = 17.9 dyn/cm = 0.179 N/m, but 17.9 dyn/cm = 0.0179
> surface_tension_gamma = 257 dyn/cm = 2.57 N/m, but 257 dyn/cm = 0.257 N/m
I haven't even heard of "dyn" as a unit...
> My previous version of the patch gave the unit as mN/cm, but I'm not sure
> that's right either.
> As Jan noted before, it isn't the first error on that page. However, the
> calculated profile matches the benchmark, so something must be right (or
> unit errors are cancelling each other out).
Not encouraging... :-/
More information about the subsurface