[discussion-187] Adding an identifier to pf_passive loop#196
[discussion-187] Adding an identifier to pf_passive loop#196imbeauf wants to merge 2 commits intoiterorganization:developfrom
Conversation
imbeauf
requested review from
DavidPCoster,
SimonPinches,
aksinghh,
medvedevsyu,
olivhoenen,
pankin,
qsthayashi,
simpla-fusion and
yegakjh
as code owners
|
Dear reviewers, only David has done his review on this PR, could you do your review ? |
SimonPinches
left a comment
SimonPinches
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not fully convinced of the need for this PR. Why do we need to associate passive loops with various objects. Shouldn't all PF passive loops be used in any calculation?
The split of passive loops between different physical objects could be done at the IDS level by having a file for cryostat, etc. Codes would then be expected to use all loops given and the choice would be made by what MD data was fed into the workflow.
| <int name="vv_inner" description="Vacuum vessel inner shell" >10</int> | ||
| <int name="vv_outer" description="Vaccum vessel outer shell" >11</int> | ||
| <int name="cryostat" description="Cryostat" >12</int> | ||
| <int name="triangular_support" description="Triangular support" >13</int> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@DavidPCoster, should the AUG passive stabilization loops appear in this list? If so, I think we need to extend this IDS to allow circuits (without power supplies) to reflect the fact that the two of them are wired in anti-series. Or are such connects PSLs always modelled as active coils / circuits without power supplies?
@MaxDubrov, could you reply to this comment from Simon ? |
8 participants
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://imas-data-dictionary--196.org.readthedocs.build/en/196/