Show the hard block volume fraction in corfunc

[lucas-wilkins]

Migrated from #1502

"compute & display the "Hard Block Volume Fraction"

What is the hard block volume fraction @smk78

[lucas-wilkins]

What is the hard block volume fraction @smk78

nudge @smk78

[lucas-wilkins]

@smk78 ??

[smk78]

Right... this turned out to be a head slapper! I remembered reading something somewhere but it's taken me time to find it again (for reference, footnote 80 on p145 of Stribeck's book!). The hard block volume fraction is nothing more than an alternative name for the local crystallinity! But, it is a better, more generic, name! The reason being that if you use a word like 'crystallinity' what interpretation do you take away if you know your sample is not actually crystalline? Correlation function analysis is not limited to crystalline samples, it's just that the proponents that developed the field mostly worked with crystalline polymers. So, to summarise, this is just a change of wording on the Corfunc GUI.

[smk78]

However, I think there is another issue about verifying exactly what values are being displayed for these parameters? It might be an idea to reconsider the parameter names as that is done... Probably best if we do that jointly @lucas-wilkins .

[lucas-wilkins]

It might be an idea to reconsider the parameter names as that is done... Probably best if we do that jointly @lucas-wilkins .

OK, I'm back on the 15th. I also notice that the output fields lack tool tips, this might be a place to mention that there are different names.

[jellybean2004]

Hi @smk78 and @lucas-wilkins! I wanted to check if this discussion is still relevant.

Would we like to go ahead with changing 'local crystallinity' to 'hard block volume fraction'?

Are there any other parameters that we should consider renaming?

[smk78]

Looking at the current Corfunc GUI (in SV 6.1.3) and the associated Help, I suggest:

• that we not rename 'Local Crystallinity' to 'Hard Block Volume Fraction' on the GUI, even though doing so would bring some consistency of wording (the GUI provides the average thickness of the Hard Block, for example). The reason being that there would then be a lot of screenshots in the Help and in the Corfunc Tutorial that would need updating!
• but that we investigate if it is also possible to add '(Hard Block Vol Frac)' under the words 'Local Crystallinity' on the GUI?
• update the parameter definitions at the bottom of the Help file corfunc-technical.rst, so that:
  • 'The structural parameters extracted are:' > 'The structural parameters extracted are [1]:'
  • 'Average Hard Block Thickness =' > 'Average Hard (/Short) Block Thickness ='
  • 'Eekhaut Polydispersity =' > 'Eekhaut Polydispersity [2] ='
  • 'Stribeck Polydispersity =' > 'Stribeck Polydispersity [3] ='
  • 'Local Crystallinity =' > 'Local Crystallinity = Hard Block Volume Fraction ='
  • 'Average Soft Block Thickness =' > 'Average Soft (/Long) Block Thickness ='
• on a new line after the 'Non-Ideality' definition say:
  • 'In normal circumstances it is expected that Lc < La.'
• add three references from the Help file corfunc-theory.rst to corfunc-technical.rst:
  • [Strobl] > becomes [1]
  • the Fibre Diffraction Review > becomes [2]
  • [Stribeck] > becomes [3]
• add something to the very top of corfunc-theory.rst (which is the Help file opened when the Help button on the Corfunc GUI is clicked) which says something like:
  • 'For an explanation of the parameters in the Corfunc window, see the Corfunc Technical Documentation' and link the words I have bolded here to corfunc-technical.rst.

I think if we make these changes we will have made the parameters as clear and accessible to the User as we reasonably can.

[smk78]

However, I think there is another issue about verifying exactly what values are being displayed for these parameters?

Unfortunately, I can no longer remember why I wrote this!

However, it would be no bad thing to just check that the Lamellar Parameters being reported on the GUI are being computed as per the definitions in corfunc-technical.rst. (I have no reason to think that they aren't).