Fixed a bug in run_uvdata_uvsim to ensure correct uvws

[bhazelton]

Description

Fixes a bug which resulted in incorrect uvws for output UVData object.

Motivation and Context

Fixes #473

Types of changes

• [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• [ ] Reference simulation update or replacement
• [ ] Documentation change (documentation changes only)
• [ ] Version change
• [ ] Build or continuous integration change

Checklist:

For all pull requests:

• [x] I have read the contribution guide.
• [x] My code follows the code style of this project.

Bug fix checklist:

• [x] My fix includes a new test that breaks as a result of the bug (if possible).
• [x] All new and existing tests pass.
• [ ] I have checked that I reproduce the reference simulations or if there are differences they are explained below (if appropriate). If there are changes that are correct, I will update the reference simulation files after this PR is merged.
• [ ] I have checked (e.g., using the benchmarking tools) that this change does not significantly increase typical runtimes. If it does, I have included a justification in the comments on this PR.
• [x] I have updated the CHANGELOG.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (d24b1c6) to head (710f28c). Report is 26 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #476 +/- ## ========================================= Coverage 100.00% 100.00% ========================================= Files 11 11 Lines 2166 2176 +10 ========================================= + Hits 2166 2176 +10 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[bhazelton]

works for me. Good idea moving some of that finalization into a new function

That refactoring was required because my added if statement made it too complex 😝