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

Add a simpler pump #4149

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #2413

As described in #2413 the idea is to have an even simpler Pump when we don't care about N, efficiency and pump characteristics.

@HansOlsson HansOlsson requested a review from casella June 13, 2023 11:59
@HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sjoelund I don't understand why C-Sources cannot be built for something that didn't change them.

@casella
Copy link
Contributor

casella commented Jun 14, 2023

Will look into it ASAP, I'm overbooked now.

@sjoelund
Copy link
Member

sjoelund commented Jun 15, 2023

java.io.IOException: Failed to kill container '3fb88ac4d9f4dc9472b40d83e6a3120bdf9b91476fec41468d39fac9a60011ed'.
	at org.jenkinsci.plugins.docker.workflow.client.DockerClient.stop(DockerClient.java:187)

Should work when I rerun it...

@beutlich beutlich added enhancement New feature or enhancement L: Fluid Issue addresses Modelica.Fluid (excl. Dissipation) labels Jul 2, 2023
@beutlich beutlich changed the title Add a simpler Pump. Add a simpler pump Jul 2, 2023
Copy link
Member

@beutlich beutlich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The required file comparisonSignals.txt is missing for the new example SimplerHeatingSystem. (Unfortunately we have no CI check for it though I tried it some years ago).

Modelica/Fluid/Examples/Explanatory.mo Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor Author

The required file comparisonSignals.txt is missing for the new example SimplerHeatingSystem. (Unfortunately we have no CI check for it though I tried it some years ago).

Added (well, copied to be correct).

Copy link
Member

@hubertus65 hubertus65 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Works in Modelon Impact and looks ok. In terms of user friendliness for beginners: this is pretty complex.

Note that this is a protected parameter so it is only shown for base-classes.
I decided to have the conditions both as description and as Dialog.enable
to make it understandable.
Modelica/Fluid/Machines.mo Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: tobolar <tobolar@users.noreply.github.com>
constant SI.Position unitHead = 1;
constant SI.MassFlowRate unitMassFlowRate = 1;

parameter Boolean ignoreN = false "= true to ignore N of pump; only use if checkValve=false and use_powerCharacteristic=false"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
parameter Boolean ignoreN = false "= true to ignore N of pump; only use if checkValve=false and use_powerCharacteristic=false"
parameter Boolean ignoreN = false "= true, if N of pump is ignored, i.e. N = N_nominal"

Copy link
Contributor

@tobolar tobolar Jan 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"only use if checkValve=false and use_powerCharacteristic=false" - we don't use such description to comment the "enable" annotation in other models

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Generally I agree, but I wanted to make an exception here.

Normally if you have enable=animation for an animation-parameter you can intuitively understand the logic and having the explanation would just be silly, but here enable is based on two different parameters that are on different tabs (and I don't want to move them) - and people will basically have to read the source to understand it.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok. So simply reject my suggestion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or enhancement L: Fluid Issue addresses Modelica.Fluid (excl. Dissipation)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Simpler Modelica.Fluid.Machines.ControlledPump
6 participants