Update default CPW mesh size and global mesh grading #127
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
hughcars
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2026
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Updates default CPW mesh size to
2 * min(trace, gap)(usingmininstead ofmax). (Closes #17.) Based on benchmarking simulations of simple CPW resonators, this is a better starting point for AMR in Palace when the trace and gap are different. Even though you have more mesh elements, the cost of simulation (in core hours for a given accuracy) can go down, because mesh elements with high aspect ratio cause slow convergence in the linear solver. The factor of2seems to be a sweet spot as well.Also updates global mesh grading default from
0.9to0.75, which anecdotally is more robust with complex geometries, and did not add significant cost in benchmarking simulations. (Closes #104.)