Updated PF numbering in outputs - #4519
Conversation
… any CS coils labelled as PF 6 as CS in both MFILE.DAT and OUT.DAT
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4519 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 49.30% 49.41% +0.10%
==========================================
Files 150 150
Lines 29769 29867 +98
==========================================
+ Hits 14679 14759 +80
- Misses 15090 15108 +18 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
chris-ashe
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kj5248 Have noticed that the coil numbering in the plots now starts from 2. Can you quickly update that to and I will take a full look after
chris-ashe
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All OUT.DAT looks ok, though I am getting a bug for plot_pf_dimensions() when running the ST regression were it does not do the final coil, Coil 8 in this case
|
@chris-ashe > All When I run the ST regression and use plot summary on it i get this which has 8 PF coils?
Although I did notice somewhere in the OUT.dat for ST which seems wrong but wanted to double check. Under waveforms it drops to 7 coils and a CS, feels like this is wrong?
|


Description
closes #4502
In MFILE.DAT and OUT.DAT there were many places where PF coils were numbered from 0. This has been updated to start from 1.
Also in places such as Volt Second Consumption and Waveforms all the circuits were numbers, the final number has now shows CS as that's what it is. However in the PF Circuit Waveform Data section I left the circuit_var_name as the original as it is a var not an output name.
Checklist
I confirm that I have completed the following checks: