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

Enable heterogeneous inflow in FlorisStandin #112

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Sep 20, 2024

Conversation

misi9170
Copy link
Collaborator

@misi9170 misi9170 commented Aug 30, 2024

This pull request provides the ability to provide a heterogeneous inflow, such as one measured at a site or generated by a LES simulator, to be used as inflow data to the FlorisStandin wind farm model.

To do list:

@misi9170 misi9170 added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 2, 2024
@misi9170 misi9170 self-assigned this Sep 2, 2024
@misi9170
Copy link
Collaborator Author

misi9170 commented Sep 2, 2024

@genevievestarke This is now ready for review (tests are passing locally). It could be worth testing with the data on Kestrel to check there aren't any snags before merging.

@genevievestarke
Copy link
Collaborator

Is there a heterogeneous wind input csv file for the example? I don't see it in the example folder, maybe you forgot to override the csv exemption?

@misi9170
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Is there a heterogeneous wind input csv file for the example? I don't see it in the example folder, maybe you forgot to override the csv exemption?

Sorry about that @genevievestarke ! I forgot to exclude the input csv from the .gitignore and then didn't notice it was missing from the repo. That's corrected now. In future, to avoid this issue, it could be nice for data files like this to be stored in a separate subdirectory of example_case_folders/ that we can put a wild card exclusion for in the .gitignore. I started going down that path in fixing the current problem, but decided to wait and implement a more complete fix in future if we decide to go with something like suggested in #113 .

Anyway, hopefully the example can now be run.

@genevievestarke
Copy link
Collaborator

This looks good, and I was able to run it! Are there any post processing files you have to look at the outputs, by any chance?

@misi9170
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This looks good, and I was able to run it! Are there any post processing files you have to look at the outputs, by any chance?

I don't, but I could put a short script together?

@genevievestarke
Copy link
Collaborator

No worries, we can add that after the milestone

@genevievestarke genevievestarke merged commit 69ed95c into NREL:develop Sep 20, 2024
6 of 9 checks passed
@misi9170 misi9170 mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants