Fixed EFD_Control rules and priorities#1
Open
ArneKummerow wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
The priorities in the EFD_Control.txt will not lead to the intended behavior. Since rule EFD01 has no PRIORITY and all the others have PRIORITY 5, rules EFD02T2, EFD02T3, EFD02T4, EFD02T6 will always apply. This effectively sets the orifices to the base control values, except for the tank with the highest water level, which is set to 1. Rule EFDO1 and rules EFDO3TX have therefore no effects. From the SWMM documentation [1]: "A rule without a priority value always has a lower priority than one with a value. For two rules with the same priority value, the rule that appears first is given the higher priority." Since rules EFD02TX all have an else clause, they always set the orifices, overwriting the setting from rule EFD01 and taking precedence over the EFD03TX rules due to their earlier occurrence. After applying this fix and running the simulation, I obtained a total flood volume of 243,946 m^3 compared to 244,436 m^3 I get when running the simulation with the original rules. Just as a side note: When applying this fix and removing EFD01, I obtained a total flood volume of 239,287 m^3. [1] https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-02/documents/epaswmm5_1_manual_master_8-2-15.pdf
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The priorities in the EFD_Control.txt will not lead to the intended behavior. Since rule EFD01 has no PRIORITY and all the others have PRIORITY 5, rules EFD02T2, EFD02T3, EFD02T4, EFD02T6 will always apply. This effectively sets the orifices to the base control values, except for the tank with the highest water level, which is set to 1. Rule EFDO1 and rules EFDO3TX have therefore no effects. From the SWMM documentation [1]: "A rule without a priority value always has a lower priority than one with a value. For two rules with the same priority value, the rule that appears first is given the higher priority." Since rules EFD02TX all have an else clause, they always set the orifices, overwriting the setting from rule EFD01 and taking precedence over the EFD03TX rules due to their earlier occurrence. After applying this fix and running the simulation, I obtained a total flood volume of 243,946 m^3 compared to 244,436 m^3 I get when running the simulation with the original rules. Just as a side note: When applying this fix and removing EFD01, I obtained a total flood volume of 239,287 m^3.
[1] https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-02/documents/epaswmm5_1_manual_master_8-2-15.pdf