Issue 871 quickplot

[valentinsulzer]

Description

Improvements to QuickPlot as discussed in #871
Might be good to check out the branch locally and try it to assess the changes

Fixes #871

Type of change

Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Optimization (back-end change that speeds up the code)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

• No style issues: $ flake8
• All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --unit
• The documentation builds: $ cd docs and then $ make clean; make html

You can run all three at once, using $ python run-tests.py --quick.

Further checks:

• Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #886 into develop will increase coverage by 0.19%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #886      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    97.81%   98.00%   +0.19%     
===========================================
  Files          207      207              
  Lines        10740    10912     +172     
===========================================
+ Hits         10505    10694     +189     
+ Misses         235      218      -17     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pybamm/meshes/meshes.py	98.91% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
pybamm/meshes/one_dimensional_submeshes.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...m/models/full_battery_models/base_battery_model.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
pybamm/parameters/parameter_values.py	99.21% <100.00%> (ø)
pybamm/processed_variable.py	98.52% <100.00%> (+1.62%)	⬆️
pybamm/quick_plot.py	100.00% <100.00%> (+1.13%)	⬆️
pybamm/simulation.py	97.44% <100.00%> (+3.16%)	⬆️
pybamm/expression_tree/unary_operators.py	96.87% <0.00%> (+0.26%)	⬆️
pybamm/util.py	100.00% <0.00%> (+2.29%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 1b0e0c5...c76a8a2. Read the comment docs.

[Scottmar93]

Looks great @tinosulzer so nice being able to sim.plot() for 2D variables now :) I'm just having a play around at the moment and will note a few comments down here:

Might be prefereable to change the axis at every time point for 2D variables. For example sim.plot(["Positive current collector potential [V]"] is just a single colour if we use the axis limits across the entire time (instead of at a specific time). Similarly for the concentrations in the particles.

Might be better to do in another issue but feel that for 3D variables we should raise a more helpful errors. E.g. for a 2+1D model doing: sim.plot(["Negative particle surface concentration [mol.m-3]"]) fails with local variable 'first_dim_pts' referenced before assignment which is a bit cryptic. This occurs for the defaults of sim.plot() so would need to be fixed when 2+1D stuff becomes more standard.

I think docs need updated on to show that the inputs to quickplot can be either a simulation or a solution object.

[TomTranter]

Do I need to update some widgets packages - I don't see slider on dynamic plot anymore

[valentinsulzer]

@Scottmar93 ok, I will put the changing limits as default and leave the fixed ones as an option. I'll also just raise an error for 3D variables at the start

@TomTranter possibly, I have ipywidgets==7.5.1 and matplotlib==3.1.2

[TomTranter]

@tinosulzer updated and still no slider in windows

[TomTranter]

@Scottmar93 @rtimms can you quickly test this again and approve?

[valentinsulzer]

I just need to figure out how to add the option for fixing axis limits or not