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

Improve conversions between hydrolib and xarray dataset #590

Open
10 tasks
veenstrajelmer opened this issue Oct 17, 2023 · 0 comments
Open
10 tasks

Improve conversions between hydrolib and xarray dataset #590

veenstrajelmer opened this issue Oct 17, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@veenstrajelmer
Copy link
Collaborator

veenstrajelmer commented Oct 17, 2023

Follow up from: #527

Todo:

  • assume FM quantity name in long_name attr in dfmt code, eg in plipointsDataset_to_ForcingModel and underlying functions. This makes uxuy exceptions less hard coded and accepts flexible variable names just like FM. We now use if hasattr(ds[datavar],'long_name') to rename the variables instead.
  • consider locationname as var instead of attr to align singlepoint and multipoint netcdf dataset
  • document _maybe_convert_fews_to_dfmt, restructure and explain why parts are necessary. Consider renaming. Not super important since it is a private function
  • back-forth conversion also works for 2d timeseries, tidal bc and other cases? What happens in case of multiple quantities in bc file? Or quantities with unequal amount of points/nodes/times >> they will get nans since dims are aligned upon concatenation
  • update example script/notebook to convert entire forcingmodel instead of only one forcingobj/point >> first support dataset of entire forcingmodel in Dataset_to_T3D?
  • test ncbnd from workinprogress_interpolate_uds_toplipoints.py in fm run>> include unittest if none fails
  • add nc writing as option to modelbuilder funtion and interpolate example script
  • Add support for writing ForcingModel to netcdf instead of bc file HYDROLIB-core#318 (might not be necessary)
  • fix sonarcloud code smells
  • increase code coverage for new functions
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant