Add new Mocca API #19
Conversation
| state0 = Jutul.setup_state(model, | ||
| Pressure = p_init, | ||
| y = y_init', | ||
| function setup_process_state(model; kwargs...) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it make sense to call this setup_initial_state or setup_initial_process_state? This is an open question!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The namings are basically a direct mapping from that of JutulDarcy.jl. I think the word setup gives some hint of "initial-ness", but it doesn't hurt to chuck in an initial into the naming, e.g., setup_initial_process_state as you suggest.
| return dcb_forces | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| function setup_cyclic_forces(model, stage_times; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it makes sense to abstract this away quite so much. A cyclic adsorption system could have "any" combination of process steps in "any" order (within reason). I have some logic for setting this up using a dictionary of named process steps in the simple_api branch I started working on. I will look at trying to incorporate it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree. This was a quick fix for getting very specific implementation details out of the example scripts, so something in between sounds good.
This PR adds an API to Mocca.jl that abstracts away much of the internals from the user.