Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
We introduce an abstraction layer between the material models and the solver via the MaterialManager class. At the heart of it, the material manager controls (possibly) multiple material models within the microstructure. Phases that are represented with different labels in the microstructure image could belong to different material classes.
This PR also introduces a change in the way material model information is prescribed in the input JSON, which is documented in the README. But I quietly support the old way of prescribing the material information for now to maintain backward compatibility.
This would also address and hopefully close #49.
Checklist:
CHANGELOG.md.