RS/JDJ/Rule 11-10 #1578
RS/JDJ/Rule 11-10 #1578
Conversation
| modeled_standby_loss_b = swh_efficiency_b.get( | ||
| standby_loss_target_metric_b | ||
| ) | ||
| to_remove = efficiency |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dont quite understand the remove here.
The current implement removes the first one meeting the condition, and assign modeled_standby_loss_b
Then at line 248, the code requires only one efficiency_data remain for modeled_efficiency_b
In scenarios
- one matched entries - this could return either
modeled_standby_lss_bis None andmodeled_efficiency_loss_bnot None ormodeled_standby_loss_bis not None andmodeled_efficiency_loss_bis None. - Two matched entries - depends on condition,
modeled_standby_loss_bandmodeled_efficiency_bcould be both None or have some values. - More than three matched entries, than this will only return
modeled_standby_loss_bor bothmodeled_standby_loss_bandmodeled_efficiency_bare None.
Is the bullet point 3 a desired behavior? If bullet point 3 condition would never met, than clearly there is pre-condition for the efficiency_data list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The length of efficiency_data will be a maximum length of 2 based on the usage of the table lookups. This will only occur in the case where it is a gas storage water heater with input rating >105,000 Btu/h where it will include the efficiency rating 80% Et and also the standby loss rating SL >= (Q/800 + 110 ), Btu/h. Otherwise there will be EITHER an efficiency rating in Et or UEF, OR a standby loss rating in %h or Btu/h, OR no matching data from the lookup
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i see, that is the precondition for the efficiency_data. Could you add a comment to describe this pre_condition?
| assert_( | ||
| equipment_type in valid_equipment_types, | ||
| f"Invalid equipment type. Must be one of {valid_equipment_types}", | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think maybe just use assert instead of assert_? I check this again and feel like this will only be triggered by software implementation error instead of project file.
@JacksonJ-KC thoughts?
… into RS/JDJ/rule11-10
add comment to state the precondition of efficiency_data list change assert_ to assert as the error is likely caused by software developers, not the RPD files.
I am finished with the rule implementation and TCDs. Ready for review!