Skip to content
GitLab
Projects Groups Snippets
  • /
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
  • Sign in
  • ExaHyPE-Engine ExaHyPE-Engine
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
    • Locked Files
  • Issues 68
    • Issues 68
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
    • Iterations
    • Requirements
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
    • Test Cases
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Environments
    • Releases
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • CI/CD
    • Insights
    • Issue
    • Repository
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Snippets
    • Snippets
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • ExaHyPEExaHyPE
  • ExaHyPE-EngineExaHyPE-Engine
  • Issues
  • #196
Closed
Open
Issue created Nov 02, 2017 by Ghost User@ghostContributor

Fix musclhancock scheme for certain patch sizes

For me, for certain patch sizes, our 2nd order FV scheme in ExaHyPE (musclhancock) fails. Godunov runs fine. This has to be debugged (it certainly depends on the patch size: Some work, some not).

2nd order is crucial for some applications (GRMHD,CCZ4).

I will do this, ticket just for book keeping.

Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking

LRZ Homepage | Datenschutz | Dokumentation und Betriebsbedingungen | Impressum