Hi,
opm-parser #1065 https://github.com/OPM/opm-parser/pull/1065 was just merged,
which restructures the opm-parser makefiles and layout a little bit. More
importantly, this makes opm-parser *completely* independent from opm-common,
and uses that opportunity to use some modern(ish) cmake featu
Thank you, Andreas.
I abandoned that (even though the function, as you point out, exists) in favour
of just recording the double from WellState.
From: Andreas Lauser
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 5:11:44 PM
To: opm@opm-project.org
Cc: Jørgen Kvalsvik
WellStateFullyImplicitBlackoil::perfPhaseRates
The perfRates() vector contains *reservoir volume* total rates at the
perforations, while the perfPhaseRates() vector contain
*surface volume* rates per phase. So it is not a direct sum.
Atgeirr
26. sep. 2016 kl. 14.10 skrev Jørgen Kvalsvik
mailto:jo...@statoil.com>>
Hi,
What's the difference between these two vectors? Is perfRates just the sum of
the pair/triples in perfPhaseRates?
---
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any un
You need to 'cd' into the build directory:
mkdir build
cd build
cmake ../devel
From: Opm on behalf of XiaoYun Wang
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:36:50 AM
To: opm@opm-project.org
Subject: [Opm] ERT cmake problem
Hi
I try to install ERT.ecl in my PC, red
Hi all,
Summary support is developing rapidly. Once #65 is merged the following list of
keywords can be output:
CGIRFGIRH FLIRFOPRH FWPTH GLPRH GWIRWGITWLPRH WTHP
CGITFGITFLITFOPTGGIRGLPTGWIRH WGITH WLPTWWCT
CGPRFGITH FLPRFOPTH
The support for custom vectors is rather non-existent still unfortunately, but
if it's something that's useful to you during testing you can quickly patch
opm-output to do it for your case. Would that work for you?
Fra: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] på
Hi,
please update and rebuild to the latest ERT master to keep opm-parser building.
---
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
Hi,
Recent changes have made opm-core dependent on opm-output, and opm-output does
no longer depend on opm-core. If you're building master from source, please
make sure to update your repositories, clean out your build caches and build
opm-output before you build opm-core.
- Jørgen
-
Hi,
We're almost ready to merge a massive change set to opm-output, and a highlight
from that change set is that the new Summary support is switched on. As with
all new development we, unfortunately so, have to prepare for bugs and quirks.
Sorry about that.
With the apologies out of the way, h
Hi,
In order to support summary output of the WI*-family of keywords I need to read
injector-oriented data from the simulator. Currently a tuple of rates (water,
oil, gas, polymer etc.) associated with each well. This feels very production
centric - can I derive injection from here (negative pr
: Opm [opm-boun...@opm-project.org] på vegne av Atgeirr Rasmussen
[atgeirr.rasmus...@sintef.no]
Sendt: 6. april 2016 11:55
Til: opm@opm-project.org
Emne: Re: [Opm] Oil-water-gas rates at perforation in simulators
6. apr. 2016 kl. 11.48 skrev Jørgen Kvalsvik
mailto:jo...@statoil.com>>:
And
: opm@opm-project.org
Emne: Re: [Opm] Oil-water-gas rates at perforation in simulators
6. apr. 2016 kl. 10.34 skrev Jørgen Kvalsvik
mailto:jo...@statoil.com>>:
Hi,
I'm working on a better way of doing (Eclipse-compatible) output, and need to
grab some info from the simulators
Hi,
I'm working on a better way of doing (Eclipse-compatible) output, and need to
grab some info from the simulators.
I have a WellState (and possibly Well* from opm-core) that I want to extract
rates at some perforation. It seems to me that the perfRates in WellState only
store the combined r
Jeg begynner i Statoil nå mandag (11. januar), så jeg blir nok å høre fra.
From: Roland Kaufmann
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 9:19 AM
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik
Subject: Re: [Opm] Thesis - Enhancing OPM-based Reservoir Simulation via PETSc
integration
Den
First of all, I'm very sorry this took so long. There was an
administrative error at NTNU, so my thesis was not evaluated until now.
I call attention to my work and activity on the OPM mailing list and the
OPM Meeting in Trondheim in February. My report on the work has finally
been published,
On 05/22/2015 01:09 PM, Atgeirr Rasmussen wrote:
> Dear OPM community,
>
> We have been considering how to best refactor the (huge) class
> FullyImplicitBlackoilSolver
> in such a manner that it can be more easily be extended with new options and
> functionality
> without copying the whole class
Hi,
I'd like to use ResInsight (or something similar) to visualise a grid
with its 4 rock files and the result after running the upscaler-relperm.
The question is: how do I feed ResInsight the rockfiles and the output
from upscaler-relperm? The documentation does not discuss it as far as I
could
On 03/16/2015 07:07 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
> On 16/03/15 18:43, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>> Right, but isn't this also, I suppose implicitly, reforming the
>> unchanged sparsity structure?
>
> "It depends".
>
> Specifically, it depends specificall
On 03/16/2015 06:34 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
> On 16/03/15 18:28, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>> On 03/16/2015 05:07 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
>>> We currently implement the second approach. The matrix sparsity
>>> (connection) structure does not change between calls t
On 03/16/2015 04:43 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
> On 16/03/15 16:11, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
> in the periodic case, it uses plain assignment S_[i][j] = x,
>> whereas in all the other cases it uses +=.
>
> Do you mean *Dirichlet* case rather than periodic in the above statement?
On 03/16/2015 04:06 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
> On 16/03/15 15:51, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>> On 03/16/2015 02:49 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
>>> On 26/01/15 13:00, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>>>> In the periodic case, will some indices be encountered twice?
>>
On 03/16/2015 02:49 PM, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
> On 26/01/15 13:00, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
> Sorry about the delay. I was just going through my old e-mail and
> noticed that I didn't see an answer to this question. I'll provide one
> for
As a part of testing PETSc in OPM I want to port selected pieces of the
codebase to use PETSc instead of dune. An obvious choice is the
benchmark (and by extension IncompFlowSolverHybrid), as it already tests
the correctness of the computation.
Since I have to rip parts of this open anyways, I fig
On 26. jan. 2015 12:59, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
On 26. jan. 2015 12:47, robert.kloefk...@iris.no wrote:
Hello Jørgen,
great. If you have access to a super computer it would be very
interesting to know,
how the recently implemented new versions of GMRes and CG (that
implement overlapping of
Hi,
I am porting the IncompFlowSolverHybrid, which serves as a major
component in the upscale-relperm-benchmark, to PETSc.
Most of this file and procedure is in need of refactoring. A step in
that direction is figuring out what is going on, in particular in the
addCellContrib function.
http
h the spring.
Sincerely,
Jørgen Kvalsvik
___
Opm mailing list
Opm@opm-project.org
http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm
On 01/13/2015 11:32 AM, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently playing with implementing (proper) support for petsc in
> OPM. For this we need better containers and interfaces than petsc's own.
>
> The thing is, petsc doesn't support direct memory ac
Hi,
I'm currently playing with implementing (proper) support for petsc in
OPM. For this we need better containers and interfaces than petsc's own.
The thing is, petsc doesn't support direct memory access. While this is
good object oriented practice, it creates some headaches when
implementing ref
On 12/15/2014 06:48 PM, Andreas Lauser wrote:
>
> I suppose this depends on whether you consider boost as a stop-gap measure
> for
> stuff which is not yet available in the oldest supported compiler or if you
> would like to use it as much as possible.
Or some other third-party library. Point i
On 12/15/2014 05:56 PM, Joakim Hove wrote:
>> I'd just like to pitch in one more consideration: do we really need to roll
>> our own logging implementation? Wouldn't boost's logging library be enough?
>> It has capabilities such as multiple backends, and is far less for us to
>> maintain.
> Yes
On 12/14/2014 09:56 PM, Joakim Hove wrote:
> earlier this autumn Andreas submitted a ParserLog class which has been
> used in the Parser for some time. I would now like to promote this to a
> general logging facility for OPM. I have thought quite a lot about it,
> but not implemented much[1]. I wil
On 12/15/2014 09:15 AM, Joakim Hove wrote:
> I’m also extremely skeptical to global variables – and singletons are in
> my opinion just glorified global variables; however I have decided I am
> old enough to make an exception for logging. Asking google about the
> topic I also get the impression th
On 12/14/2014 09:56 PM, Joakim Hove wrote:
> 1. The logging facility should be implemented as a singleton, i.e.
> it should not be necessary to pass in a reference to a log class to all
> methods/functions which might want to add a log message.
Not so sure. This gives an inherent synchronizat
On 2014-11-19 11:11, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
On 2014-11-19 17:41, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
On 2014-11-19 07:27, Alf Birger Rustad wrote:
Hello everybody,
I am guilty of creating yet another repository in opm. [...]
Honestly, I don't think it's that good an idea to have separate
re
On 2014-11-19 11:11, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
On 2014-11-19 17:41, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
On 2014-11-19 07:27, Alf Birger Rustad wrote:
Hello everybody,
I am guilty of creating yet another repository in opm. [...]
Honestly, I don't think it's that good an idea to have separate
re
On 2014-11-19 07:27, Alf Birger Rustad wrote:
Hello everybody,
I am guilty of creating yet another repository in opm. Please provide
feed-back if you like it or not. We can rename it or even delete it.
It is called opm-utilities and currently hosts the python script
summaryplot. Right now it is
On 14. nov. 2014 16:56, Arne Morten Kvarving wrote:
did you knoll? does istl start out with knoll as well?
I'm afraid I don't know what knoll is, so I wouldn't know.
sorry for being cryptic, figured you'd run into it by now :)
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-current/docs/manualpages/KSP
On 14. nov. 2014 16:38, Arne Morten Kvarving wrote:
On 14/11/14 15:33, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
I have an update and a few questions regarding my project. For
introduciton and details, please see
http://www.opm-project.org/pipermail/opm/2014-October/000664.html
This will be another wall-of-text
On 14. nov. 2014 16:33, Bård Skaflestad wrote:
On 2014-11-14 15:33, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
I have an update and a few questions regarding my project. For
introduction and details, please see
http://www.opm-project.org/pipermail/opm/2014-October/000664.html
Thanks a lot for the update. I
On 14. nov. 2014 17:33, wireless wrote:
> On 11/14/14 09:33, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>> I have an update and a few questions regarding my project. For
>> introduciton and details, please see
>> http://www.opm-project.org/pipermail/opm/2014-October/000664.html
>
> Im
does require a little
bit more work. Personally I prefer solution #3, but I'd love some
community feedback on that.
Sincerely,
Jørgen Kvalsvik
___
Opm mailing list
Opm@opm-project.org
http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm
On 10/28/2014 08:56 PM, Markus Blatt wrote:
> Hi Jørgen,
>
>
> I am one of the guys behind DUNE and especially dune-istl. Therefore I
> might have wrong stereotypes concerning other packages and be not
> objective in this regard.
>
Duly noted.
>> There is some code available,
>> see the LinearS
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: [OPM] Making OPM modular: support for more linear solvers
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:31:23 +0100
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik
To: Arne Morten Kvarving
On 10/28/2014 01:24 PM, Arne Morten Kvarving wrote:
On 28/10/14 13:19, Atgeirr Rasmussen wrote:
hi
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: [OPM] Making OPM modular: support for more linear solvers
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:35:26 +
From: Atgeirr Rasmussen
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik
28. okt. 2014 kl. 13:27 skrev Jørgen Kvalsvik :
On 10/28/2014 01:19 PM, Atgeirr Rasmussen wrote
back on this work and if it is the right way to go or if the there
are some other ideas on how to solve this issue.
Sorry for the wall of text, but I felt some background was necessary.
I look forward to the discussion.
Sincerely,
Jørgen Kvalsvik
___
The question came up here: https://github.com/qilicun/opm-core/pull/2
What does the project prefer to handle error codes from 3rd party libraries?
In this case, CHKERRXX is delegating to a print-error function and a
(C++) exception. Obviously, I prefer not to introduce a variable for
this and rat
On 2014-09-05 12:28, robert.kloefk...@iris.no wrote:
Hello Jørgen,
the DUNE_VERSION_NEWER macro needs the header
dune/common/version.hh
Maybe that is missing.
Best,
Robert
I have the header installed. The problem is that the cmake modules has a
"feature test" by compiling a trivial C++ p
Another git-related build issue.
commit c4e08e278bfaccc4c427f164c34fa32e07d24c76
Author: Martin Nolte
Date: Fri Aug 24 07:04:50 2012 +
more parallel headers into subdirectory parallel (see FS#1055)
[[Imported from SVN: r6925]]
This patch in DUNE moves several headers from dune/c
Building the latest master HEAD (4fa0ca9) of opm-parser without using
ert-git breaks, and the makefile does not reflect this.
The commit in ert in question is this
https://github.com/Ensembles/ert/commit/499587ad9608d7648f16f4f391c5ceb1b117dcda
along with it's child commit
https://github.com/
50 matches
Mail list logo
