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

Allow units up to 999 to support processing of ENDF/B-VIII.1 light water TSL evaluation #356

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

paulromano
Copy link
Member

Currently, unit numbers for files are limited to be less than 100, which as best as I can tell was a limitation in Fortran prior to the Fortran 90 standard (and/or support in compilers). In modern Fortran, there is no such limitation and thus NJOY should allow higher unit numbers if and when needed. I found that when processing the ENDF/B-VIII.1 evaluation for H in H2O, I needed unit numbers >= 100 because there are so many temperatures listed. In my NJOY input, I run ACER once for each temperature and ended up needing unit numbers all the way up to 213. The change in this PR simply allows NJOY to use unit numbers up to 999, which should cover most conceivable use cases.

@whaeck whaeck self-requested a review January 21, 2025 16:22
@whaeck
Copy link
Member

whaeck commented Jan 21, 2025

Yes, for H in H2O there's 94 temperatures so if you do everything in a single NJOY run, you will run out of numbers. I tend to run a single input file for each temperature to get around any issues.

However, if this increases the tape number count without issues, I'm all for it. We may have to verify that there's no other places where the tape number is checked outside of the openz function.

We will also need the following:

  • an update to the release notes under NJOY2016.78
  • a test using tape numbers larger than 100. This can be any input deck, but is should run relatively quickly.

@paulromano
Copy link
Member Author

@whaeck I just added a short test and updated the release notes. Let me know if anything else is needed!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants