Skip to content

Address SAM issue #1733 while keeping functionality of SAM issue #1184#1176

Merged
sjanzou merged 2 commits into
patchfrom
SAM_1733
Jun 26, 2024
Merged

Address SAM issue #1733 while keeping functionality of SAM issue #1184#1176
sjanzou merged 2 commits into
patchfrom
SAM_1733

Conversation

@sjanzou

@sjanzou sjanzou commented Jun 20, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

To test:

  1. pull SAM_1733 branch of ssc and patch branches of other repos and build
  2. create PVWatts/Commercial case
  3. Financial parameters page - set straight line depreciation years to 0
  4. select straight line depreciation and run - error as expected
  5. select different depreciation method and run - no error as expected.

See NatLabRockies/SAM#1733 for simulation error in current release.

@cpaulgilman cpaulgilman left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm still seeing the error after cleaning and rebuilding. This is for the default PVWatts / Commercial case switching to 5-yr MACRS after setting straight line depreciation years to zero:

image

@sjanzou

sjanzou commented Jun 21, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

I'm still seeing the error after cleaning and rebuilding. This is for the default PVWatts / Commercial case switching to 5-yr MACRS after setting straight line depreciation years to zero:

image

@cpaulgilman , could you please clean (and delete SAM-private\build_windows folder if testing from the SAM-private build) and make sure the ssc.dll used is the latest
image

I am not able to replicate the error unless "Straight line" depreciation is selected - tested Federal and State switching between all Depreciation mode selections runs without error.
image

@sjanzou sjanzou requested a review from cpaulgilman June 21, 2024 07:39

@mjprilliman mjprilliman left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Worked for me when testing. Where else should SKIP_CONSTRAINT_CHECK be applied (question for a different issue/PR)?

I can't replicate the Windows test failure on my build.

@sjanzou sjanzou left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

reviewed and tests with @mjprilliman

@sjanzou sjanzou dismissed cpaulgilman’s stale review June 26, 2024 06:04

Changes verified with recompiled ssc dll

@sjanzou sjanzou merged commit b1cd876 into patch Jun 26, 2024
@sjanzou

sjanzou commented Jun 26, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Worked for me when testing. Where else should SKIP_CONSTRAINT_CHECK be applied (question for a different issue/PR)?

I can't replicate the Windows test failure on my build.

SKIP_CONSTRAINT_CHECK should be used anywhere for an optional ssc variable that is required only if some other variable is set to a specific value. The example of SAM issue NatLabRockies/SAM#1733 is a perfect example in which the optional "years" value for straight line depreciation is required only if the depreciation selection is 2. Then the "years" input for the user should be checked to be positive (the CONSTRAINT field in the vartable).

@sjanzou sjanzou deleted the SAM_1733 branch June 26, 2024 06:11
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Simulation fails from Federal straight line depreciation check even when it is disabled

3 participants