Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CLT - results dictionary could be clearer #7

Open
joaopbernhardt opened this issue Mar 10, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

CLT - results dictionary could be clearer #7

joaopbernhardt opened this issue Mar 10, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@joaopbernhardt
Copy link
Owner

joaopbernhardt commented Mar 10, 2018

In the results given by calc_stressCLT in the CLT module, the current returned data structure is like this:

return {"LCS" : {"strain" : {"inf" : LS_strain_inf,
                                 "sup" : LS_strain_sup}}, 
            "MCS" : {"stress" : {"inf" : MS_stress_inf,
                                 "sup" : MS_stress_sup}, 
                     "strain" : {"inf" : MS_strain_inf,
                                 "sup" : MS_strain_sup}}}

Where LS_strain_inf, LS_strain_sup... are lists of the size [3 x number_of_layers].
The dimension 3 is related to the 3 stresses/strains types (i.e. sigma1, sigma2, tau).
This means that the current format is:

MS_stress_inf = [sig_1, sig_2, tau]

It would be better to continue the formatting in a cascading dictionary for easier understanding of what the results hold, that is:

MS_stress_inf = {'sig_1': value, 'sig_2': value, 'tau': value}

This change will result in errors in the Failure Criteria module, which will have to be adjusted to this new format.

@joaopbernhardt
Copy link
Owner Author

Does this change has too big an impact in performance? I'll look into this.

@joaopbernhardt joaopbernhardt changed the title CLT - results disctionary could be clearer CLT - results dictionary could be clearer Mar 10, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant