Hi Kurt, Sorry for taking so long to get to this email which i think rather makes your points. I am cc’ing Dave to see if we can address the mattermost membership issue. I do not really know what to do about the list. We (senior developers) would like to support questions but often we get too overloaded to respond. We do have some good users who help with each others answers which is great to see but we do not get enough of that. I am not actually sure whether most of my researchers are also registered on the list and so perhaps that would be good since they could possibly respond (I will check). Your question below is an interesting one but possibly it might be quite constraining for some application? In many situations I believe the spatial error is dominant so we get away with different time series approximations but that is not the case in all situations. I would be interested to hear if others have a ideas on how to enforce this. Cheers, Spencer. On 24 Dec 2021, at 02:10, Kurt Sansom <kayarre@gmail.com<mailto:kayarre@gmail.com>> wrote: This email from kayarre@gmail.com<mailto:kayarre@gmail.com> originates from outside Imperial. Do not click on links and attachments unless you recognise the sender. If you trust the sender, add them to your safe senders list<https://spam.ic.ac.uk/SpamConsole/Senders.aspx> to disable email stamping for this address. Hi nektar++ community, It seems like I can't join the mattermost as the membership is exceeded. What other alternatives should I consider to get feedback about ideas or questions? It seems like the email list gets minimal attention (historically) especially for someone who is peripherally involved? I would like to throw out some ideas every once in a while, but I'm not sure the best place to put them. My current one has to do with implementing time dependent boundary conditions that are a function of the time stepping method. I.e. for a boundary condition that manages a state similar to a time stepping method should it be constrained to the type and kind of time stepping method. For example, if a Linear multistep method such as adams bashforth is employed. Any boundary condition that uses some derived quantity to define the boundary condition could be defined with a similar method or if you use a different method (Backwards finite difference) wouldn't you lose accuracy at the boundary? How does that affect the global solution? Maybe the broader topic is coupling different fidelity models? Because any time dependent boundary condition that uses derived quantities is essentially solving some kind model and applying it at the boundary. Happy random quandaries, Regards, ~Kurt -- Kurt Sansom _______________________________________________ Nektar-users mailing list Nektar-users@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:Nektar-users@imperial.ac.uk> https://mailman.ic.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/nektar-users