You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Testing the Wind Energy model with sample data (populated in Workbench with the .json file we provide), both density_W_per_m2.tif and harvested_energy_MWhr_per_yr.tif (and possibly others related to valuation) return values that are outside of the input wind data extent, which they shouldn't do.
Here are the relevant bits from the Slack thread between Stacie and Rob Griffin:
SW: Also, the student noticed that the raster outputs have data outside of the wind_energy_points area, which seems strange - most of the darkest blue area in this screenshot.
RG: Raster values outside the wind data are definitely an issue for both density_W_per_m2.tif and harvested_energy_MWhr_per_yr.tif and any of the valuation outputs that are not included here. Looks like the bilinear interpolation is filling in areas in the results, which is why you get results in places where there is no underlying wind data. Seems like a missed masking step in the model to constrain outputs to only exist in areas with wind data points.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Testing the Wind Energy model with sample data (populated in Workbench with the .json file we provide), both density_W_per_m2.tif and harvested_energy_MWhr_per_yr.tif (and possibly others related to valuation) return values that are outside of the input wind data extent, which they shouldn't do.
Here are the relevant bits from the Slack thread between Stacie and Rob Griffin:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: