Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix duplicate boundaries in Delwaq generation. #1903

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2024
Merged

Fix duplicate boundaries in Delwaq generation. #1903

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2024

Conversation

evetion
Copy link
Member

@evetion evetion commented Oct 15, 2024

Fixes #1901
Fixes #1902

This disables any dispersion in the Delwaq model, fixing some tracer intrusions.

#1902 was actually two issues:

  • In the graph simplification, we didn't anticipate boundary to boundary connections (UserDemand to Terminal, in use at IJmuiden). We now just remove the Terminal node/edge from it.
  • UserDemands are the only boundaries that occur twice (when not connecting back to the same Basin, those are merged to one edge), and that results in a duplicate boundary name, as it was based on type + node_id.

@visr
Copy link
Member

visr commented Oct 15, 2024

Looks good to me overall. I think we should remove the 3 print statements, since this is a valid Ribasim model.
Is there a way to test this easily? Should we for instance read the log you linked in #1902 in test_delwaq.py and ensure that WARNING does not occur or something like that?

@evetion
Copy link
Member Author

evetion commented Oct 15, 2024

I will make the prints debug, and the warnings errors, that should trigger one such a thing happens again in the tests.

@evetion
Copy link
Member Author

evetion commented Oct 16, 2024

Should we for instance read the log you linked in #1902 in test_delwaq.py and ensure that WARNING does not occur or something like that?

There are several warnings (that we can safely ignore) in the output file, so that's hard to test. I'd say if it runs, it runs 🤷🏻 (and we can parse the output). Let's revisit this when we bundle/wrap Delwaq.

@visr visr merged commit 540174f into main Oct 16, 2024
25 of 27 checks passed
@visr visr deleted the fix/delwaq-bounds branch October 16, 2024 13:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Delwaq UserDemand edges/flows give warnings Delwaq Rhine tracer concentrations in Maas/Waal canal
2 participants