[Task] Update Cyclus Tutorial

[abachma2]

What is this task about?

This issue describes specific items in the current Cyclus user tutorial that Amanda thinks should be updated or changed.
Index.rst

• Remove mention of needing an internet connect -- no longer needed since we don't have the server anymore
• Make sure the second scenario has a growing energy demand, given that the description says it does

Install_launch_cyclus.rst:

• Reconcile the navigation to the install cyclus page (which does include installing cycamore) with pointing towards the Cycamore github source code.

Sim_parm.rst:

• Fix the indention of Item 5 on the control block description -- renders weird
• Add note about the flexibility of time steps -- they don't always have to be 1 month
• Adjust the first activity description -- it reads a little weird to me, like you're supposed to do it on your own but the text walks you through the activity.

add_arche.rst:

• Fix a missing work in the Source description, "Source is a generic source of material [that] may fill the role..."
• In the Cycamore description, add the missing archetypes: Conversion (?? This one isn't in a stable release yet), Mixer, and Storage
• In the discover available archetypes activity, add note about python archetypes not being shown here.
• In the discover available archetypes activity, remove part about not using Cyclus on your machine.
• In the discover available archetypes activity, add note about seeing the non-facility Cycamore archetypes
• Adding archetypes activity: Change wording of "Let's build our archetypes!". This sentence sounds like we might be building the source code/writing a new archetypes. Maybe change to "Let's build our archetypes [block] of the input file"
• Adding the archetypes activity: Do we need a second template of the archetypes block? Can we remove the second?
• Adding the archetypes activity: Add note about the order of the archetypes not mattering -- maybe add this to the footnote?

add_commod_recipe.rst:

• Add link to the DRE pages of the website
• There is a mention of institutions in the third paragraph of the commodity description, but the tutorial hasn't discussed institutions yet.
• Don't really discuss what a mutual request is, but we mention it
• Concept: Recipes: "isotropic" instead of "isotopic"
• At the end of Concept: Recipes we describe 2 compositions to use in the simulation, but the table in Creating a recipe has 3. Add in the description of the natural uranium to the end of Concept: Recipes
• Replace figure with the recipe block parts identified -- maybe just change to text? At the very least remove the illegal - in the example
• Why does the footnotes section have (1,2) at the start? Because there are two links to the footnote on the page?

add_proto.rst:

• The first few paragraphs feel redundant to the archetypes page. Suggestion to remove it, and replace with a paragraph with a description more focused on what a prototype is.
• In the Source Prototype example, "Supplies material results in corresponding decrease in inventory" feels awkward. "Suppl[ying] material [from the Source prototype] results in [a] corresponding decrease"?
• Activity: Configure Source Prototype: fix the Source in the first template
• Enrichment prototype definition: spell out EF acronym
• Make sure the archetype templates match with names in the tables
• Reactor archetype section mentions regions, but that hasn't been mentioned yet.
• In the reactor prototype section, do we want to explicitly call out the reactor being in the US?
• The format of the Reactor prototype section differs from the others -- make them more consistent
• Correct the in_commod_prefs description for the Sink prototype
• Creating Sink prototype: Correct name in the text, currently has UraniumMine

add_reg_inst.rst:

• Change italicized archetype names to code text in the first set of bullet points
• We have them add in the region and institution to the archetypes block before we really talk about the concepts. Do we want to keep this?
• "each institution block defines an agent that acts as an institution in the simulation". Do we want to adjust this sentence?
• Move the note about multiple entry blocks to before the code
• The example showing two institutions for one simulation feels disconnected to me. It feels like "by the way, this is a thing, but we won't be using it for this example". Suggestion to figure out a better way to tie it in, or move it elsewhere.
• Activity: The name tag is required for the institution and the region, but there is only 1 mention of it in the table. Need to reconcile this.
• We currently have them build an institution with 3/4 of the facilities, then tell them the reactor will be in a different institution -- should we reorder that?
• Activity: Add an extra institution into the Region: We have them build the first institution (with fuel cycle facilities) again in this activity?
• Full input: We have recipes near the beginning, but the whole tutorial we said to put multiple things ahead of that section.

run_cyclus_native.rst:

• We have a paragraph about choosing where to run -- do we still want this if we don't have a cloud version to run on?

add_second_reactor.rst:

• Talks about adding a lifetime to the reactor, but I'm not sure we've made it clear how to do that.

add_arche_commod_recipe.rst:

• Make it more clear that they should start from one of the previous input files
• For adding the Used-MOX-Fuel recipe, do we mean to have the 4 in the text?

add_sep.rst:

• Make sure the input format matches what we have elsewhere in the tutorial

add_fab.rst:

• Fix link to equivalence method in first paragraph

add_deploy.rst:

• Fix formatting of table for Add New Institution
• Fix header formatting for Add New Institution

General:

• Update the Exelon to Constellation in the tutorial?
• We have things broken into 2 example problems, but we have 4 input files. I feel like that should match up better -- removing the saving of 2 of them, or break up the exercises to correspond with when we have the user save input files.

How can this issue be closed?

This issue can be closed either when all items in the list are checked off, or if the community reaches a conclusion that the unchecked items should not be updated/changed.