Implement active volume calculation for cracks #66
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #66 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 34.25% 34.04% -0.21%
==========================================
Files 28 28
Lines 1854 1865 +11
==========================================
Hits 635 635
- Misses 1219 1230 +11 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
fhagemann
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2024
|
None of the test detectors have cracks, that's why the codecoverage fails. |
|
Great job and thank you @apearsonn . Looks good to me and can be merged! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, the active volume calculation for detectors with cracks was not implemented.
I did the calculation and added the formulas for vertical and inclined cracks to the code.
The only thing missing is the handling of
fccd,@fhagemann: could you add this?