-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
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
[13pt] Possible bug in Sierra test / rating_curve_comparion #1302
Comments
Duration system added with 1301, but this other part could still be a bug. Also added a new bug at the bottom of the main body about no such dir when starting the log file. |
Here are some examples comparing the new results with the old results. The script will always use the first feature_id in the new feature branch unless its flow is significantly lower than the USGS maximum flow (see figure below). This likely occurs due to incorrect crosswalking. In the figure below, the red dot represents the USGS gauge. The blue lines indicate the flowline for branch nonzero (left figure), while the green lines represent the flowline for branch 0 (right figure). The associated flow for the red lines is significantly lower for branch 0, which should be part of the main channel with a higher flow. |
Ok. cool. Well.. let's just make to catch and handle it gracefully. :) |
A PR (1301 is pending merging for rating_curve_comparison which simply add a duration system.
During testing for that change, a possible bug was detected in the logic.
A large number of HUCs were processing well, but also a very large amount of both warnings and errors.
Below is a copy/paste from the log outputs:
doesn't seem like any 15050302 made it through
missing USGS rating curve data for usgs station 09484500 in huc 15050302
missing USGS rating curve data for usgs station 09484000 in huc 15050302
missing USGS rating curve data for usgs station 09485000 in huc 15050302
missing USGS rating curve data for usgs station 09484580 in huc 15050302
As mentioned, this might not be a problem. If not, maybe we can add some notes to the file to help manage expectations.
This review / possible change will be needed in the next four weeks appx, as we are preparing for another BED/production run.
Update: Nov 13, 2024
We need to create the output folder earlier in the stack:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "//foss_fim/tools/rating_curve_comparison.py", line 1303, in
logging.FileHandler(os.path.join(output_dir, f'rating_curve_comparison_{log_dt_string}.log')),
File "/usr/lib/python3.10/logging/init.py", line 1169, in init
StreamHandler.init(self, self._open())
File "/usr/lib/python3.10/logging/init.py", line 1201, in _open
return open_func(self.baseFilename, self.mode,
FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/data/fim_performance/hand_4_5_11_1/rating_curve_comparison/rating_curve_comparison_2024_11_13-18_27_46.log'
Wed Nov 13 18:27:46 UTC 2024
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: