4400 remove hardcoded bc20m and tc0m

[chris-ashe]

Description

Checklist

I confirm that I have completed the following checks:

• My changes follow the PROCESS style guide
• I have justified any large differences in the regression tests caused by this pull request in the comments.
• I have added new tests where appropriate for the changes I have made.
• If I have had to change any existing unit or integration tests, I have justified this change in the pull request comments.
• If I have made documentation changes, I have checked they render correctly.
• I have added documentation for my change, if appropriate.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 47.67442% with 45 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 49.42%. Comparing base (c0ae5b2) to head (6e34d58).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
process/models/stellarator/coils/coils.py	4.54%	21 Missing ⚠️
process/models/pfcoil.py	37.50%	10 Missing ⚠️
process/models/tfcoil/superconducting.py	38.46%	8 Missing ⚠️
process/core/init.py	64.28%	5 Missing ⚠️
process/models/superconductors.py	95.23%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4478      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   49.32%   49.42%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         150      150              
  Lines       29802    29884      +82     
==========================================
+ Hits        14700    14771      +71     
- Misses      15102    15113      +11     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[clmould]

A few small things

[clmould]

1 tiny thing

[clmould]

Found a few remaining hard-coded values to be updated to use the SuperconductorModel values instead. Also 2 more things:

• There are some hard coded values in documentation/plotting_scripts - could these be updated to use the SuperconductorModel too please?

• Also one instance of jcrit_rebco needs the new args adding still in 2nd_gen_rebco_critical_surface.py (can they be done as keyword args please):

[clmould]

In documentation/scripts/plotting_scripts/old_empirical_nbti_critical_surface.py, can the args b_c20max and temp_c0max in jcrit_nbti() use the SuperconductorModel please:

[clmould]

Some changes to the variable check, but all good otherwise :)

[clmould]

Suggested change

	for field_name in ("bcritsc", "tcritsc"):
	field_definition = tfcoil_fields.get(field_name)
	if field_definition is None:
	continue
	if field_definition.default is not MISSING:
	default_value = field_definition.default
	elif field_definition.default_factory is not MISSING:
	default_value = field_definition.default_factory()
	else:
	continue
	if getattr(data.tfcoil, field_name) != default_value:
	raise ProcessValidationError(
	f"Cannot set {field_name} for non-user-defined superconductors"
	)
	for field_name in ("bcritsc", "tcritsc"):
	field_definition = tfcoil_fields.get(field_name)
	if field_definition is not None:
	if field_definition.default is not MISSING:
	default_value = field_definition.default
	if getattr(data.tfcoil, field_name) != default_value:
	raise ProcessValidationError(
	f"Cannot set {field_name} for non-user-defined superconductors"
	)

Hopefully formats correctly! Just a shorter way of doing the same thing - the else was never getting hit, so can be removed, and the default_factory was not needed since bcritsc and tcritsc are always floats so the elif would never be hit either