Addendum d fixes required to pass validation of air-cooled chiller examples #64
Conversation
| @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ Performance: | |||
| condenser_liquid_type: | |||
| Description: "Type of liquid in condenser" | |||
| Data Type: "{LiquidMixture}" | |||
| Required: "if condenser_type = LIQUID" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@TimMcDowell @tanaya-mankad this is just a syntactical limitation of the legacy schema code. The legacy schema-205 code was silently misinterpreting this. In 232, we may want to build in some flexibility here.
| @@ -300,32 +300,32 @@ GridVariablesCooling: | |||
| Data Type: "[Numeric][1..]" | |||
| Units: "m3/s" | |||
| Constraints: ">0.0" | |||
| Required: "if condenser_type = LIQUID" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So far our conditional requirements have all relied on data elements in the same data group. If we want to refer to a data element in a parent (or other ancestor) data group, 232 will need to establish a syntax for doing so.
I've captured this in the Lattice repo: bigladder/lattice#48
| @@ -300,32 +300,32 @@ GridVariablesCooling: | |||
| Data Type: "[Numeric][1..]" | |||
| Units: "m3/s" | |||
| Constraints: ">0.0" | |||
| Required: "if condenser_type = LIQUID" | |||
| Required: False | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For now, the only way around this is to make these not required for now. This is of course moot if we decide to move air-cooled and liquid cooled performance into separate maps.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tanaya-mankad the changes here were needed to make the JSON Schema work properly. Not sure if the additional collector layer was needed for something else, but we should make sure we make Lattice consistent.
No description provided.