Other useful variables #2740

valentinsulzer · 2023-03-02T00:55:58Z

Description

Add some useful variables, fix plot_voltage_components and add example

Type of change

Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.

New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Optimization (back-end change that speeds up the code)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

No style issues: $ pre-commit run (see CONTRIBUTING.md for how to set this up to run automatically when committing locally, in just two lines of code)
All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --all
The documentation builds: $ python run-tests.py --doctest

You can run unit and doctests together at once, using $ python run-tests.py --quick.

Further checks:

Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

review-notebook-app · 2023-03-02T00:56:03Z

Check out this pull request on

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

Powered by ReviewNB

codecov · 2023-03-02T21:45:14Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and no project coverage change

Comparison is base (b2f8b62) 99.68% compared to head (6a3c26c) 99.68%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2740   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    99.68%   99.68%           
========================================
  Files          270      271    +1     
  Lines        18949    18991   +42     
========================================
+ Hits         18890    18932   +42     
  Misses          59       59

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pybamm/input/parameters/ecm/example_set.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/Ai2020.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/Chen2020.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
...input/parameters/lithium_ion/Chen2020_composite.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/Ecker2015.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/Marquis2019.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/Mohtat2020.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/NCA_Kim2011.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/OKane2022.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
pybamm/input/parameters/lithium_ion/ORegan2022.py	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
... and 46 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

valentinsulzer · 2023-03-03T18:12:06Z

This PR looks nasty but it's mainly a lot of renaming variables, as detailed in CHANGELOG

brosaplanella

Looks good, thanks! Just a couple of small comments

brosaplanella · 2023-03-04T11:32:58Z

CHANGELOG.md

+## Features
+
+- Renamed "Terminal voltage [V]" to just "Voltage [V]". "Terminal voltage [V]" can still be used and will return the same value as "Voltage [V]".
+- Added "Anode potential [V]", which is the value of the surface potential difference (`phi_s - phi_e`) at the anode/separator interface, commonly controlled in fast-charging algorithms to avoid plating. Also added "Cathode potential [V]", which is the value of the surface potential difference at the cathode/separator interface. ([#2740](https://github.com/pybamm-team/PyBaMM/pull/2740))


Shouldn't it be "Positive electrode" and "Negative electrode" so it is consistent with the other variables?

The full name for this would be "Negative electrode surface potential difference at the separator interface". But I think in the fast-charging literature it's just called "Anode potential". Which do you think is better here?

Mmmm good point. The first choice is a bit of a mouthful, but I think we should use it to be consistent (i.e. use positive and negative electrode everywhere, rather than mixing it with anode and cathode). Especially, as just calling it "Anode potential" would be confusing with the existing "Negative electrode potential [V]", right?

Yes true, I'll change it to the longer one

examples/scripts/compare_lithium_ion.py

Co-authored-by: Ferran Brosa Planella <Ferran.Brosa-Planella@warwick.ac.uk>

TomTranter · 2023-03-31T08:33:57Z

This caused liionpack to break as I was using the Measured battery ocv. Also when I changed to use the new OCV results looked strange and so I'm now using surface ocv.

TomTranter · 2023-03-31T08:34:38Z

I think it might be nice to have some example of what they all mean and where they are used

rtimms · 2023-03-31T08:40:37Z

What was "Measured open circuit voltage [V]" has been renamed to "Surface open-circuit voltage [V]". This is the OCV calculated from the surface concentration. "Open-circuit voltage [V]" is calculated from the bulk.

Since the thing you would actually measure as (pseudo) OCV in an experiment is the surface OCV, I wonder if "Open-circuit voltage [V]" and "Surface open-circuit voltage [V]" should be the same, and we should also have "Bulk open-circuit voltage [V]".

We could explain this more thoroughly in the plot voltage components notebook

TomTranter · 2023-03-31T08:52:23Z

I agree if the more observable one is Surface that should be the "Open-circuit voltage [V]", what is the bulk one used for?

rtimms · 2023-03-31T09:01:23Z

So you can separate out the effect of concentration gradients within the particle on the voltage

valentinsulzer · 2023-03-31T12:20:44Z

I think the "Open-circuit voltage" should be the one that you would eventually relax to if you turned the current off, i.e. the bulk one. What makes the surface one more observable?

rtimms · 2023-03-31T12:52:41Z

It's just a point of notation where we should be consistent. If you asked people "what is the OCV?" in their model they would probably say U_p(c_p_surf) - U_n(c_n_surf) which is what we now call "Surface open-circuit voltage [V]". I agree that it makes sense to have a bulk open-circuit voltage variable (the one you relax to), but is this consistent with the defn most people have in their head when thinking about continuum models?

valentinsulzer · 2023-03-31T13:01:39Z

Got it. There's also the option of just not defining "Open-circuit voltage" so you have to specify bulk or surface explicitly each time. We should update this either way before releasing

valentinsulzer added 5 commits February 27, 2023 20:41

add other useful variables

2897671

Merge branch 'issue-2418-dimensional' into other-useful-variables

0a3a616

fix voltage component plot

847d317

update CCCV example to be more standard

5a20808

add voltage components example

461ccb1

valentinsulzer added 4 commits March 1, 2023 19:56

Merge branch 'develop' into other-useful-variables

f5490a3

changelog

314810a

fix some tests

ce7d117

fix tests

222808a

valentinsulzer added 3 commits March 2, 2023 17:23

fix output tests

34f7c37

coverage

ffe3028

docs

c27f8af

valentinsulzer requested review from rtimms and brosaplanella March 3, 2023 18:11

brosaplanella approved these changes Mar 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

valentinsulzer and others added 3 commits March 6, 2023 10:28

Update examples/scripts/compare_lithium_ion.py

cc880c7

Co-authored-by: Ferran Brosa Planella <Ferran.Brosa-Planella@warwick.ac.uk>

rename variables

ddfeafd

fix examples

6a3c26c

valentinsulzer merged commit 9d5f5a1 into develop Mar 6, 2023

valentinsulzer deleted the other-useful-variables branch March 6, 2023 19:04

valentinsulzer mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2023

rename Open-circuit voltage to Bulk open-circuit voltage #2845

Merged

8 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Other useful variables #2740

Other useful variables #2740

valentinsulzer commented Mar 2, 2023

review-notebook-app bot commented Mar 2, 2023

codecov bot commented Mar 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

valentinsulzer commented Mar 3, 2023

brosaplanella left a comment

brosaplanella Mar 4, 2023

valentinsulzer Mar 6, 2023

brosaplanella Mar 6, 2023

valentinsulzer Mar 6, 2023

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023

valentinsulzer commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

valentinsulzer commented Mar 31, 2023

Other useful variables #2740

Other useful variables #2740

Conversation

valentinsulzer commented Mar 2, 2023

Description

Type of change

Key checklist:

Further checks:

review-notebook-app bot commented Mar 2, 2023

codecov bot commented Mar 2, 2023 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

valentinsulzer commented Mar 3, 2023

brosaplanella left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brosaplanella Mar 4, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

valentinsulzer Mar 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brosaplanella Mar 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

valentinsulzer Mar 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023

TomTranter commented Mar 31, 2023

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023

valentinsulzer commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

valentinsulzer commented Mar 31, 2023

codecov bot commented Mar 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

valentinsulzer commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rtimms commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading