Do I need to treat boundary pores differently when simulating Fickian diffusion?

[ryanvolpi]

I am trying to simulate diffusion through a wall. The image below is a sort of top down view, where the left side represents the inlet and the right side the outlet. I am running into some issues. I'm wondering if they are related to how the boundary pores on the left and right side are being handled. For example, this tutoral states:

"The boundary pores we've added to the network should be treated a little bit differently. Specifically, they should have no volume or length (as they are not physically representative of real pores). To do this, we create two separate Geometry objects, one for internal pores and one for the boundaries"

My question is: do I need to create a seperate geometry object for the boundary pores? And, if so, how do I make sure that these pores have no effect when simulating fickian diffusion?

Top-down image:

Thank you!

[ma-sadeghi]

Is this an extracted network? If so, did you extract it using PoreSpy?

[ma-sadeghi]

Hmm, could you share the code?

[ryanvolpi]

Here is a minimal reproduceable example

import porespy as ps
import openpnm as op

im = ps.generators.blobs(shape=[50, 50, 50], porosity=0.6)
snow_output = ps.networks.snow2(im, boundary_width=[3, 3, 3])
pn, geo = op.io.PoreSpy.import_data(snow_output.network)

air = op.phases.Air(network=pn)
phys_air = op.physics.Basic(network=pn, phase=air, geometry=geo)

h = pn.check_network_health()
op.topotools.trim(pn, pores=h['trim_pores'])
op.topotools.label_faces(pn)

fd = op.algorithms.FickianDiffusion(network=pn, phase=air)
fd.setup(phase=air)
fd.set_value_BC(pores=pn.pores("top"), values=1)
fd.set_value_BC(pores=pn.pores("bottom"), values=0)
fd.run()

[ma-sadeghi]

Thank you. I ran your code and indeed, it failed. It seems to be a bug in the way we do parallelization. To mitigate the issue for now, pass parallelization=None to snow2 to skip that part (I checked and it successfully ran). Also, could you please open up an issue and report this bug? Thank you so much!

[ryanvolpi]

Are you saying I just I need to pass parallelization=None to snow2? I tried that and it did not resolve the issue. I have no problem with snow2 running, just with fd.run()

I created an issue to report the bug.

[ma-sadeghi]

Oh, I see. So, I don't think this is a bug. I wrote something for you in the issues page.