search

F2I-Consulting / fesapi

API for ENERGISTICS™ data standards (mainly RESQML™), multi-languages (C++, Java, C#, Python)
Apache License 2.0
34 stars 24 forks source link

Support of RockFluidOrganizationInterpretation #107

Closed untereiner closed 5 years ago

untereiner commented 5 years ago

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. There is no RockFluidOrganizationInterpretation support.

Describe the solution you'd like I want Fesapi to support it.

Describe alternatives you've considered Attach IJKGrids to EarthModel instead

Additional context Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

philippeVerney commented 5 years ago

Hi Lionel,

Similar answer than to your previous feature request. This month is not the easiest one for me to answer quickly to the community. I may have more time after April 15. However, I definitely confirm the need for this support.

In order accelerate support, think about:

untereiner commented 5 years ago

Hi Philippe,

I know you are busy. This issue acts more as a reminder. Mid of april is fine. I'll see if I have time and/or knowledge to make a PR during this time.

untereiner commented 5 years ago

Hi Philippe,

Thanks again for the help! I have two IJKgrids in my epc file linked to a RockFluidOrganizationInterpretation. But at loading I have getGridRepresentationCount() == 0. I can not figure out why my grids are not attached to it. Since you looked/modified the work, could you maybe have an idea ?

ps: I will verify if they are correctly attached

philippeVerney commented 5 years ago

At import time, the link is instantiated from line 1015 of AbstractGridRepresentation.cpp. You should put a breakpoint here.

philippeVerney commented 5 years ago

I have looked at the example.cpp and I don't see obvious error.

The link instantiation is in detail called line 1026 and then 1036. You should firs tlook if you indeed hit those lines for your two grids.

untereiner commented 5 years ago

I just looked into my file and my grid is linked to the RockFluidOrganizationInterpretation via a representedInterpretation and not via CellFluidPhaseUnits->FluidOrganization. Should it be that way as in AbstractRepresentation ?

philippeVerney commented 5 years ago

This is a pure RESQML question not a FESAPI question ("maybe" a question for the FESAPI forum). I cannot talk for the standard. My humble opinion is that, with the design adopted by your files, you would lose some information such as which cells belong to which fluid units. Consequently my personal opinion is : in general, no it should not be that way.

I close this issue since, for fesapi, this topic is resolved. Feel free to open another one for discussion in the fesapi forum or bring the question to the standard.

Fixed in #116