-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
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 KRUSTY 15 Cents Reactivity Insertion Model #478
base: devel
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@ycao-anl FYI |
16e5ec7
to
2b0db79
Compare
Job VTB Documentation, step Sync Docs on a02dd53 wanted to post the following: View the site here This comment will be updated on new commits. |
2b0db79
to
d8de6aa
Compare
@GiudGiud This is to add a transient model to the existing KRUSTY model. Thanks in advance for your review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you ll want to add a few tags to the main krusty page, mainly RIA ?
any ideas for testing? can we regenerate the checkpoint file in a testing run (ideal) ?
doc/content/microreactors/KRUSTY/Griffin-BISON_Multiphysics_15C_Reactivity_Insertion_Test.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
doc/content/microreactors/KRUSTY/Griffin-BISON_Multiphysics_15C_Reactivity_Insertion_Test.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
RIA might not be the ideal term as this is a warm critical test instead of an accident test. Maybe just use "warm critical test"? Testing could be tricky as it will rely on the steady-state simulation checkpoint/SolutionVector output files, which also depend on the mpi ranks used. Any suggestion? |
Co-authored-by: Guillaume Giudicelli <[email protected]>
Running the steady case then running the transient is the easiest.
alternatively, if we LFS checked in the steady checkpoint we would have to be mindful of that |
there s a model under "Reactivity Insertion" already, for MR drum. could go with that one? |
It takes ~4 hours on 10 sawtooth nodes to finish SN(2,3) NA=3 steady state. Maybe we can try SN(1,3) NA=1 and force it to finish after one Richardson iteration and start the transient to run one timestep? |
we can try something like that though we wont see a steady state in the beginning of the transient |
Let's try to see how long it takes to run such a case. |
Good news: SN(1,3) NA=1 steady state with one Richardson iteration takes ~1000 seconds to run using 40 cores on a sawtooth node. Maybe we can run the "simplified" steady-state case and then do syntax check only for the transient? |
can we reduce the mesh maybe? |
Let me try |
Reducing axial mesh density works. Using SN(1,3) NA=1 and allowing Richardson iteration to converge, the steady-state run takes ~2 hours and one time step transient takes about 500 seconds. I guess, this is okay for a "heavy" test. |
Added the tests. It seems the syntax override+!include does not like |
@GiudGiud Let me know if these tests are okay or if you have any additional comments. Thanks. |
Will do. |
closes #477