Skip to content

Docs: mean_temp_wall known limitation (particle arrays, high-Mach single-temperature runs) - #2250

Open
sbryngelson wants to merge 1 commit into
MFlowCode:masterfrom
sbryngelson:docs/mean-temp-wall-known-issue
Open

sbryngelson wants to merge 1 commit into
MFlowCode:masterfrom
sbryngelson:docs/mean-temp-wall-known-issue

Conversation

@sbryngelson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Adds a known-limitation note to the mean_temp_wall paragraph of docs/documentation/case.md. In periodic arrays of spheres at 12 cells per diameter the decay rate beta drifted by more than 1% over the run, and hot-wall and cold-wall runs disagreed; the cause is not understood. A single-wall-temperature run at high Mach number is also biased by viscous heating, which a hot and a cold run cancel to first order. The plane channel (examples/2D_thermal_channel, within 0.1% of the analytic Nu = 7.54) is the validated use.

Docs only; no code, parameter or golden changes.

Where the numbers come from

The array drift and the disagreement were observed in development runs of this feature (sphere arrays, 12 cells per diameter) before it merged as #2200; I did not re-run them on current master for this PR, and I did not find the cause. The channel result is the example's own check. The note states the observation and says the cause is unknown; it does not claim a mechanism.

./mfc.sh precheck passes.

This PR was made with Claude Code (AI).

@sbryngelson
sbryngelson requested a review from a team as a code owner November 14, 2026 05:34
@sbryngelson
sbryngelson requested review from danieljvickers and removed request for a team November 14, 2026 05:34
@sbryngelson
sbryngelson marked this pull request as draft November 14, 2026 05:34
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Claude Code Review

Head SHA: b68adf6

Files changed:

  • 1
  • docs/documentation/case.md

Findings:
No issues found. Checked in step 4: docs/documentation/case.md (docs-only hunk; no Fortran or Python changes, and no context file was provided).

@sbryngelson
sbryngelson marked this pull request as ready for review November 14, 2026 05:41

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant